MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413627919 · doi:10.1016/j.mattod.2025.08.017

Revolutionizing light capture: a comprehensive review of back-contact perovskite solar cell architectures

2025· article· en· W4413627919 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials Today · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPerovskite Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersHirose Foundation
KeywordsPerovskite (structure)Materials scienceSolar cellPerovskite solar cellNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsEngineering physicsPhysicsEngineeringChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Back-contact architectures are emerging as a transformative solution to overcome optical and structural limitations inherent to conventional sandwich-type perovskite solar cells (PSCs). While single-junction PSCs have reached certified power conversion efficiencies (PCEs) of up to 27.0 %, their reliance on transparent conductive oxides (TCOs) and front-contact layers introduces significant photon losses and design constraints. Interdigitated back-contact (IBC) and quasi-interdigitated back-contact (QIBC) geometries eliminate the need for front-side electrodes, enabling full-area top illumination, enhanced optical efficiency, improved mechanical flexibility, and simplified recycling. In this Review, we systematically examine the development of back-contact PSCs, focusing on the interplay between device architecture, charge carrier dynamics, and fabrication strategies. We compare state-of-the-art patterning methods, including nanoimprint lithography, microsphere templating, and electrodeposition, and summarize material systems employed for electron/hole transport and insulation. Recent experimental devices have achieved over 12 % PCE, and simulations predict efficiencies exceeding 29 %, highlighting the untapped potential of back-contact designs. We also discuss the critical challenges, such as short diffusion lengths, interfacial recombination, and fabrication scalability, and propose design guidelines to accelerate the path toward high-efficiency, manufacturable back-contact PSC technologies.

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.

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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.210 · 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