% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Krckemeier:866282,
author = {Krückemeier, Lisa and Rau, Uwe and Stolterfoht, Martin and
Kirchartz, Thomas},
title = {{H}ow to {R}eport {R}ecord {O}pen‐{C}ircuit {V}oltages in
{L}ead‐{H}alide {P}erovskite {S}olar {C}ells},
journal = {Advanced energy materials},
volume = {10},
number = {1},
issn = {1614-6840},
address = {Weinheim},
publisher = {Wiley-VCH},
reportid = {FZJ-2019-05441},
pages = {1902573},
year = {2020},
abstract = {Open‐circuit voltages of lead‐halide perovskite solar
cells are improving rapidly and are approaching the
thermodynamic limit. Since many different perovskite
compositions with different bandgap energies are actively
being investigated, it is not straightforward to compare the
open‐circuit voltages between these devices as long as a
consistent method of referencing is missing. For the purpose
of comparing open‐circuit voltages and identifying
outstanding values, it is imperative to use a unique,
generally accepted way of calculating the thermodynamic
limit, which is currently not the case. Here a
meta‐analysis of methods to determine the bandgap and a
radiative limit for open‐circuit voltage is presented. The
differences between the methods are analyzed and an easily
applicable approach based on the solar cell quantum
efficiency as a general reference is proposed.},
cin = {IEK-5},
ddc = {050},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-5-20101013},
pnm = {121 - Solar cells of the next generation (POF3-121)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-121},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000495462400001},
doi = {10.1002/aenm.201902573},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/866282},
}