MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6983611149

Nano-Crystalline &Amorphous Silicon PhotoTransistor Performance Analysis

2009· dissertation· en· W6983611149 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2009
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsBlackberry (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotodiodePhotocurrentThin-film transistorAmorphous siliconDark currentPhotoresistorQuantum efficiencyResponsivity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, we compared electrical performance and stability of a novel nanocrystalline Si (nc-Si) thin film phototransistor (TFT) phototransistor and a regular amorphous silicon (a-Si:H) TFT phototransistor for large area imaging applications. The electrical performance parameters of nc-Si TFT phototransistor were extracted from the electrical (current-voltage) testing in dark and under illumination. The field-effect mobility is found to be around 1.2 cm2V-1s-1, the threshold voltage around 3.9V and the sub-threshold voltage slope around 0.47V/Dec. Optical properties of nc-Si TFT phototransistor have been evaluated under the green light illumination in the range of 1014 – 1017 lum, and the photocurrent gain and the external quantum efficiency were extracted from the experimental results. By comparing the results with those for a-Si:H TFTs measured under the same conditions, we found that nc-Si TFT has higher photo current gain under low illumination intensity, 5 ×1014 to 7 ×1015 lum. This thesis shows the relations bewteen the photo current gain, the external quantum efficiency, TFT drain and TFT gate bias; the photo current gain and the external quantum efficiency can be controlled by the Vds and the Vgs.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207