MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413356872 · doi:10.1021/acsami.5c09757

The Role of Random Texture Scattering on the Absorptance Enhancement in Halide Perovskite Layers

2025· article· en· W4413356872 on OpenAlexaff
Meng-Hsueh Kuo, Branislav Dzurňák, Neda Neyková, Lucie Landová, Ivana Beshajová Pelikánová, Z. Remeš, Chih‐Yu Chang, Stefaan De Wolf, Jakub Holovský

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPerovskite Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersGrantová Agentura České RepublikyMinisterstvo Školství, Mládeže a TělovýchovyNational Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyČeské Vysoké Učení Technické v Praze
KeywordsMaterials scienceHalidePerovskite (structure)Texture (cosmology)AbsorptanceScatteringOpticsChemical engineeringInorganic chemistryReflectivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid perovskites are a class of thin-film semiconductors with remarkably steep absorption edges and high absorption coefficient. In the case of solar cells, a film thickness of less than a micrometer is usually sufficient to absorb most of the light when combined with a back reflector. Otherwise, an efficient light trapping strategy may be desired, e.g., in the case of tandem or semitransparent cells. Traditionally, light trapping is accomplished by employing randomly nanotextured substrates. In this contribution, absorption enhancements due to not only nanorough but also microrough substrates and with or without additional gold coating are evaluated from the point of gains in photocurrent and from the point of view of valid optical models. We find that light trapping from nanotextured substrates follows mainly the Yablonovitch model, leading to an apparent shift of absorption edge. This contrasts with microrough substrates and also the remarkable efficient light trapping capabilities of bare layers due to their native surface roughness, where the path enhancement in this case is almost uniform, making the layer optically thicker by factor two or more. Light trapping optical models as well as analytical techniques are reviewed, and new insights are presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Applied Materials & InterfacesSame topicPerovskite Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207