Development of submillimeter multijunction cells for concentrator photovoltaics (micro-CPV) and assessment of their robustness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les dispositifs photovoltaïques, dominés par les panneaux en silicium, ont su évoluer pour proposer aujourd’hui des coûts d’électricité concurrentiels aux sources fossiles. Parmi les technologies émergentes, le photovoltaïque à concentration (CPV pour Concentrator Photovoltaics) repose sur l’utilisation de systèmes optiques (miroirs ou lentilles) qui concentrent la lumière sur des cellules de faibles dimensions (< cm2) mais très efficaces (> 40%). Malgré les performances élevées des modules CPV, cette technologie n’a pas su s’imposer en raison d’un coût élevé découlant de limitations technologiques (gestion thermique, pertes résistives…). Le micro-CPV promet de répondre à ces limitations en se basant sur l’utilisation de microcellules (< mm2). Cependant, des défis restent à relever : les procédés de fabrication et d’assemblage des microcellules doivent être adaptés, en s’inspirant de la microélectronique notamment, pour permettre de fortes efficacités et un coût restreint. Aussi, la fiabilité de ce nouveau type de dispositifs n’est pas connue. Ce mémoire de thèse a l’ambition de traiter de ces sujets, en se focalisant particulièrement sur les procédés de fabrication critiques.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".