MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409963794 · doi:10.3390/mi16050540

Harnessing Nanoplasmonics: Design Optimization for Enhanced Optoelectronic Performance in Nanocrystalline Silicon Devices

2025· article· en· W4409963794 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen Mahmoudysepehr, Siva Sivoththaman

Bibliographic record

VenueMicromachines · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSilicon Nanostructures and Photoluminescence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsFinite-difference time-domain methodPhotodetectorPlasmonNanocrystalline materialAbsorption (acoustics)DielectricSiliconSurface plasmonThin filmQuantum efficiencyWaveguidePhotovoltaic systemNanotechnologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanoplasmonic structures have emerged as a promising approach to address light trapping limitations in thin-film optoelectronic devices. This study investigates the integration of metallic nanoparticle arrays onto nanocrystalline silicon (nc-Si:H) thin films to enhance optical absorption through plasmonic effects. Using finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) simulations, we systematically optimize key design parameters, including nanoparticle geometry, spacing, metal type (Ag and Al), dielectric spacer material, and absorber layer thickness. The results show that localized surface plasmon resonances (LSPRs) significantly amplify near-field intensities, improve forward scattering, and facilitate coupling into waveguide modes within the active layer. These effects lead to a measurable increase in integrated quantum efficiency, with absorption improvements reaching up to 30% compared to bare nc-Si:H films. The findings establish a reliable design framework for engineering nanoplasmonic architectures that can be applied to enhance performance in photovoltaic devices, photodetectors, and other optoelectronic systems.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.831

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicromachinesSame topicSilicon Nanostructures and PhotoluminescenceFrench-language works237,207