Versatile Two‐Step Process for Perovskite‐Based Tandem Photovoltaics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perovskite photovoltaics promise high power conversion efficiencies (PCEs) and cost‐effective fabrication, making them a transformative solar technology. Among deposition methods, the solution‐based two‐step process has emerged as a promising approach for integrating high‐quality perovskite layers onto silicon (Si) bottom cells, enabling dense and pinhole‐free films. However, achieving both high efficiency and long‐term stability remains underexplored for solution‐based two‐step‐processed perovskite solar cells (PSCs). This study introduces a versatile solution‐based two‐step method, demonstrating a seamless transition from a triple‐cation (CsMAFA) to a more stable double‐cation (CsFA) perovskite composition. Implementing a novel dual bimolecular passivation strategy with propane‐1,3‐diammonium iodide (PDAI2) and n‐butylammonium iodide (BAI) for both bulk and surface passivation effectively addresses defects at grain boundaries and interfaces. This approach minimizes nonradiative recombination, enhances film crystallization, and promotes efficient charge extraction. The resulting PSCs demonstrate a stable power output of 20.9%, representing the highest reported efficiency for a solution‐based two‐step processed PSC with a bandgap of 1.67 eV. Laboratory‐scale monolithic perovskite/Si tandem solar cells (1 cm2 active area) achieve PCEs exceeding 26% on small‐textured Si bottom cells (<2 μm). This emphasizes the potential of the solution‐based two‐step process for practical implementation in high‐performance photovoltaic 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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".