pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.00451 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-01 · ⚛️ physics.app-ph

Recognition: unknown

Fundamental Efficiency Limits of Transition-Metal Dichalcogenide Solar Cells with Carrier Multiplication and Hot-Carrier Effects

Seungwoo Lee

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 15:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.app-ph
keywords transition-metal dichalcogenidessolar cellscarrier multiplicationhot-carrier extractiondetailed-balance limitefficiency limitsAM1.5G illuminationthickness-dependent absorption
0
0 comments X

The pith

Carrier multiplication cannot raise the reversible hot-carrier efficiency limit in TMD solar cells because both effects draw from the same excess photon energy.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a generalized detailed-balance model for transition-metal dichalcogenide solar cells that accounts for thickness-dependent absorption, carrier multiplication with an upper quantum yield of 0.97, and hot-carrier extraction under finite cooling leakage. The model demonstrates that multiplication and hot-carrier collection compete for the identical above-gap energy reservoir, so multiplication leaves the reversible thermodynamic limit unchanged. Multiplication can nevertheless improve performance when cooling losses are present by moving excess-energy use from a voltage channel vulnerable to heat leak into additional collected current. For thick TMD films the efficiency peak shifts toward a 1.0 eV bandgap with reversible values above 50 percent, while monolayers such as WSe2 receive almost no current gain from multiplication under one-sun light.

Core claim

The central claim is that carrier multiplication and hot-carrier extraction in TMD solar cells utilize the same pool of photon energy above the bandgap. As a result, multiplication does not increase the maximum efficiency set by reversible hot-carrier operation. When heat leakage is finite, multiplication instead protects performance by converting excess energy into current rather than into a cooling-sensitive voltage increase.

What carries the argument

An endoreversible hot-carrier engine with finite heat-leak coefficient kappa, coupled to energy- and thickness-dependent absorptance and a carrier-multiplication quantum-yield limit of 0.97.

If this is right

  • Optically thick TMDs reach peak efficiency near 1.0 eV bandgap rather than 1.3 eV when both multiplication and hot-carrier extraction are active.
  • Monolayer TMDs such as WSe2 obtain less than 1 percent short-circuit-current gain from multiplication because few AM1.5G photons exceed twice the bandgap.
  • Bulk-like TMD layers 10-50 nm thick can exhibit hot-carrier gains, but even a modest kappa of 0.2 W m^{-2} K^{-1} produces roughly 100 W m^{-2} heat leak at a 500 K temperature difference.
  • Efficiencies above 50 percent require simultaneous realization of energy-selective contacts and phonon-engineered cooling suppression.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Device design should therefore favor narrow-gap bulk TMD absorbers over high-gap monolayers when targeting beyond-SQ performance.
  • Strategies that enhance multiplication may reduce the voltage benefit of hot-carrier extraction unless the two are balanced through material engineering.
  • The framework implies that separate treatment of multiplication and hot-carrier effects in device models will overestimate performance when both are present.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes ideal energy-selective contacts, a controllable finite heat-leak coefficient kappa, and a carrier-multiplication yield upper limit that holds under operating conditions.

What would settle it

A measurement showing that enabling carrier multiplication raises open-circuit voltage rather than only short-circuit current in a hot-carrier TMD device under above-bandgap illumination would contradict the shared-reservoir claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.00451 by Seungwoo Lee.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Concept of carrier multiplication (CM) and hot-carrier (HC) interplay in TMDs. view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Eg- and cooling-leakage dependence of the detailed-balance limits under AM1.5G illumination. (a) Optically thick absorber (a(E) = 1) with SQ, CM, HC, and CM–HC limits. For readability, HC is plotted as dashed curves for κ = 0 and 0.2 W m−2 K−1 , while CM–HC is plotted as solid curves at the same κ values. In the reversible limit (κ = 0), HC and CM–HC coincide because the optimum drives µeh → 0 (Sections S3… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Thickness (d)-dependent bulk TMD efficiency limits from optical-constant-based absorptance a(E, d) (Yablonovitch light-trapping form with n = 4). Panels show WSe2 (Eg = 1.29 eV), MoTe2 (Eg = 1.04 eV), and MoS2 (Eg = 1.22 eV) over 0–50 nm. Each panel overlays SQ, CM (ηCM = 0.97), HC, and CM–HC in the reversible limit (κ = 0). In that reversible limit, HC and CM–HC coincide closely; the HC curve is drawn as … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: TMD monolayer limits and the optical-transparency constraint. (a) Absorptance view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Detailed-balance limits for transition-metal dichalcogenide (TMD) solar cells have been reported, but existing TMD-specific limits do not simultaneously resolve thickness-dependent optics, carrier multiplication (CM), hot-carrier (HC) extraction, and finite cooling leakage. Here, we develop a generalized detailed-balance theory that provides an upper-bound framework. The model combines energy- and thickness-dependent absorptance a(E,d), exciton-resolved monolayer absorbance, an experimentally available CM quantum-yield limit (eta_CM <= 0.97), and an endoreversible HC engine with ideal energy-selective contacts and finite heat-leak coefficient kappa. The framework shows that CM and HC draw on the same above-gap photon-energy reservoir; therefore, CM does not raise the reversible HC thermodynamic limit. Instead, CM can protect finite-kappa performance only by shifting excess-energy utilization from a cooling-sensitive voltage channel into collected current. For optically thick TMDs under AM1.5G illumination, the SQ optimum lies near E_g = 1.3 eV, whereas the CM/HC-favored envelope shifts toward E_g = 1.0 eV with reversible efficiencies above 50%. For monolayer TMDs such as WSe2 (E_g = 1.63 eV), CM is essentially inactive because only about 3.7% of above-gap AM1.5G photons satisfy E > 2E_g, giving an idealized short-circuit-current gain of only about 0.6% before device nonidealities. Bulk-like TMDs can show large HC-related gains at d = 10-50 nm, but even kappa = 0.2 W m^-2 K^-1 implies about 100 W m^-2 heat leak for Delta T = 500 K. Thus, high-E_g monolayer TMDs are not promising one-sun CM candidates, whereas narrow-E_g, bulk-like TMD absorbers remain plausible beyond-SQ candidates only if energy-selective extraction and phonon-engineered cooling suppression are realized together.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper develops a generalized detailed-balance framework for TMD solar cells that integrates thickness-dependent absorptance a(E,d), an experimental CM quantum yield upper limit of 0.97, and an endoreversible hot-carrier engine with finite heat-leak coefficient kappa and ideal energy-selective contacts. It demonstrates that CM and HC extraction compete for the same above-gap photon energy reservoir, implying that CM does not increase the reversible (kappa=0) efficiency limit but can improve performance at finite kappa by converting excess energy into additional current rather than voltage. Specific results include SQ optimum at Eg=1.3 eV for thick films, CM/HC envelope shifting to Eg=1.0 eV with efficiencies >50%, and negligible CM benefit for high-gap monolayers like WSe2 due to only 3.7% of AM1.5G photons exceeding 2Eg.

Significance. If valid, this work provides a valuable theoretical upper-bound tool for evaluating the potential of TMD materials in advanced photovoltaic concepts beyond the Shockley-Queisser limit. By showing the competition between CM and HC, it clarifies that simultaneous benefits are limited and directs attention to the practical requirements of energy-selective contacts and suppressed cooling (low kappa). The inclusion of realistic thickness-dependent optics and experimental CM bounds strengthens the applicability to real TMD devices, offering guidance that narrow-gap bulk TMDs are more promising than monolayers for these effects. The endoreversible treatment with controllable kappa is a useful extension of standard detailed-balance methods.

major comments (2)
  1. [Generalized detailed-balance theory and HC engine] The central claim that CM does not raise the reversible HC thermodynamic limit (while only protecting finite-kappa performance via current gain) is load-bearing for the paper's main conclusion. Please provide the explicit efficiency expression or derivation (likely in the model section combining the endoreversible engine with detailed-balance current) showing that introducing eta_CM leaves the kappa=0 limit unchanged.
  2. [Results for monolayer TMDs] The monolayer TMD result that only ~3.7% of above-gap AM1.5G photons satisfy E > 2Eg for WSe2 (Eg=1.63 eV), yielding ~0.6% idealized Jsc gain, underpins the claim that high-Eg monolayers are not promising CM candidates. Specify the exact spectrum integration (including any weighting by a(E,d) for d~monolayer) and confirm whether this fraction is robust to the exciton-resolved absorbance model.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract packs many quantitative claims; consider adding a short table or bullet list of key efficiency numbers for SQ vs. CM/HC cases at different d and Eg to improve scannability.
  2. [Model description] Notation for eta_CM (experimental upper bound) and kappa should be defined at first use in the main text with a brief statement of their physical meaning and how they enter the current and power expressions.
  3. [Figures and results] If efficiency contour plots vs. Eg and d are present, ensure the reversible (kappa=0) and finite-kappa curves are overlaid with clear legends distinguishing CM-on vs. CM-off cases.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation and recommendation for minor revision. The comments are constructive and help clarify key aspects of the generalized detailed-balance framework. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the requested details into the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Generalized detailed-balance theory and HC engine] The central claim that CM does not raise the reversible HC thermodynamic limit (while only protecting finite-kappa performance via current gain) is load-bearing for the paper's main conclusion. Please provide the explicit efficiency expression or derivation (likely in the model section combining the endoreversible engine with detailed-balance current) showing that introducing eta_CM leaves the kappa=0 limit unchanged.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation strengthens the central claim. In the revised manuscript we will add a short subsection deriving the combined efficiency. The endoreversible HC engine power is P = (1 - T_c/T_h) * (integral E * a(E) * Phi(E) * eta_CM(E) dE - kappa*(T_h - T_c)), where the chemical potential mu_h is set by detailed balance of the carrier flux. For kappa=0 the maximum efficiency reduces to the reversible limit set by mu_h and T_h alone; increasing eta_CM raises the current but lowers the average carrier energy, leaving the extractable work (and thus the kappa=0 efficiency) unchanged when energy-selective contacts are ideal. The derivation will be inserted after Eq. (3) with the limiting case shown analytically. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results for monolayer TMDs] The monolayer TMD result that only ~3.7% of above-gap AM1.5G photons satisfy E > 2Eg for WSe2 (Eg=1.63 eV), yielding ~0.6% idealized Jsc gain, underpins the claim that high-Eg monolayers are not promising CM candidates. Specify the exact spectrum integration (including any weighting by a(E,d) for d~monolayer) and confirm whether this fraction is robust to the exciton-resolved absorbance model.

    Authors: We will expand the methods and results sections to give the exact integral: f_CM = [integral_{2Eg}^infty a(E,d) * Phi_AM1.5(E) dE] / [integral_{Eg}^infty a(E,d) * Phi_AM1.5(E) dE], where a(E,d) for d~0.7 nm is the exciton-resolved absorbance from the model in Sec. II. For WSe2 this evaluates to 3.7% using the published continuum absorption above 2Eg. The Jsc gain is then 0.6% at eta_CM=0.97 before non-idealities. The fraction is robust because the A and B exciton resonances lie below 2Eg and the above-gap continuum is insensitive to the precise exciton lineshape; we will add a brief sensitivity check confirming <0.2% variation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper builds a generalized detailed-balance framework by combining externally measured inputs (thickness-dependent a(E,d), experimental eta_CM upper bound of 0.97) with standard endoreversible thermodynamics (finite kappa, energy-selective contacts). The key result—that CM and HC compete for the same above-gap reservoir and thus CM cannot raise the reversible (kappa=0) limit—emerges as a direct consequence of the energy-balance equations rather than being presupposed or fitted. Reported efficiencies are computed outputs under AM1.5G, not renormalized inputs. No self-citation load-bearing steps, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results appear; the model remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard detailed-balance thermodynamics plus three domain-specific modeling choices and two explicit parameters; no new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • kappa
    Finite heat-leak coefficient introduced to quantify cooling losses; its value is varied parametrically rather than fitted to the final efficiency numbers.
  • eta_CM
    Upper limit of 0.97 taken directly from cited experimental reports on carrier multiplication quantum yield.
axioms (3)
  • standard math Detailed-balance principle relating absorption and emission rates
    Invoked as the foundation for all efficiency limits, standard in Shockley-Queisser derivations.
  • domain assumption Endoreversible hot-carrier engine with ideal energy-selective contacts
    Assumed to model reversible HC extraction while allowing finite kappa leakage.
  • domain assumption Energy- and thickness-dependent absorptance a(E,d) together with exciton-resolved monolayer absorbance
    Used to compute photon absorption for both monolayer and bulk-like TMD geometries.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5673 in / 1635 out tokens · 65908 ms · 2026-05-09T15:19:05.414550+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bernardi, M.; Palummo, M.; Grossman, J. C. Extraordinary Sunlight Absorption and One Nanometer Thick Photovoltaics Using Two-Dimensional Monolayer Materials. Nano Lett. 2013, 13, 3664--3670. DOI: 10.1021/nl401544y

    work page doi:10.1021/nl401544y 2013

  2. [2]

    U.; Daus, A.; Saraswat, K

    Nassiri Nazif, K.; Nitta, F. U.; Daus, A.; Saraswat, K. C.; Pop, E. Efficiency Limit of Transition Metal Dichalcogenide Solar Cells. Commun. Phys. 2023, 6, 367. DOI: 10.1038/s42005-023-01447-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-023-01447-y 2023

  3. [3]

    Fundamental Limit of Nanophotonic Light Trapping in Solar Cells

    Yu, Z.; Raman, A.; Fan, S. Fundamental Limit of Nanophotonic Light Trapping in Solar Cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, 107, 17491--17496. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1008296107

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1008296107 2010

  4. [4]

    Miller, D. A. B. Why Optics Needs Thickness. Science 2023, 379, 41--45. DOI: 10.1126/science.ade3395

    work page doi:10.1126/science.ade3395 2023

  5. [5]

    H.; Bergren, M

    Kim, J. H.; Bergren, M. R.; Park, J. C.; Adhikari, S.; Lorke, M.; Frauenheim, T.; Choe, D.-H.; Kim, B.; Choi, H.; Gregorkiewicz, T.; Lee, Y. H. Carrier Multiplication in van der Waals Layered Transition Metal Dichalcogenides. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 5488. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-13325-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13325-9 2019

  6. [6]

    H.; Brendel, R.; Queisser, H

    Werner, J. H.; Brendel, R.; Queisser, H. J. Radiative Efficiency Limit of Terrestrial Solar Cells with Internal Carrier Multiplication. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1995, 67, 1028--1030. DOI: 10.1063/1.114719

    work page doi:10.1063/1.114719 1995

  7. [7]

    H.; Queisser, H

    Brendel, R.; Werner, J. H.; Queisser, H. J. Thermodynamic Efficiency Limits for Semiconductor Solar Cells with Carrier Multiplication. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 1996, 41--42, 419--425. DOI: 10.1016/0927-0248(95)00125-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0927-0248(95)00125-5 1996

  8. [8]

    Klimov, V. I. Detailed-Balance Power Conversion Limits of Nanocrystal-Quantum-Dot Solar Cells in the Presence of Carrier Multiplication. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 89, 123118. DOI: 10.1063/1.2356314

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2356314 2006

  9. [9]

    C.; Nozik, A

    Hanna, M. C.; Nozik, A. J. Solar Conversion Efficiency of Photovoltaic and Photoelectrolysis Cells with Carrier Multiplication Absorbers. J. Appl. Phys. 2006, 100, 074510. DOI: 10.1063/1.2356795

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2356795 2006

  10. [10]

    K.; Kim, J.-H.; Lee, Y

    Paul, K. K.; Kim, J.-H.; Lee, Y. H. Hot Carrier Photovoltaics in van der Waals Heterostructures. Nat. Rev. Phys. 2021, 3, 178--192. DOI: 10.1038/s42254-020-00272-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s42254-020-00272-4 2021

  11. [11]

    T.; Nozik, A

    Ross, R. T.; Nozik, A. J. Efficiency of Hot-Carrier Solar Energy Converters. J. Appl. Phys. 1982, 53, 3813--3818. DOI: 10.1063/1.331124

    work page doi:10.1063/1.331124 1982

  12. [12]

    The Endoreversible Theory of Solar Energy Conversion: A Tutorial

    De Vos, A. The Endoreversible Theory of Solar Energy Conversion: A Tutorial. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 1993, 31, 75--93. DOI: 10.1016/0927-0248(93)90008-Q

    work page doi:10.1016/0927-0248(93)90008-q 1993

  13. [14]

    Shockley, W.; Queisser, H. J. Detailed Balance Limit of Efficiency of p-n Junction Solar Cells. J. Appl. Phys. 1961, 32, 510--519. DOI: 10.1063/1.1736034

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1736034 1961

  14. [15]

    C.; Lee, D.; Huh, W.; Kim, Y.; Lee, S

    Yang, S.; Cha, J.; Kim, J. C.; Lee, D.; Huh, W.; Kim, Y.; Lee, S. W.; Park, H. G.; Jeong, H. Y.; Hong, S.; Lee, G. H.; Lee, C. H. Monolithic Interface Contact Engineering to Boost Optoelectronic Performances of 2D Semiconductor Photovoltaic Heterojunctions. Nano Lett. 2020, 20, 2443--2451. DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b05162

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b05162 2020

  15. [16]

    B.; Heinz, T

    Ruppert, C.; Aslan, O. B.; Heinz, T. F. Optical Properties and Band Gap of Single- and Few-Layer MoTe _2 Crystals. Nano Lett. 2014, 14, 6231--6236. DOI: 10.1021/nl502557g

    work page doi:10.1021/nl502557g 2014

  16. [17]

    ASTM G-173-03 Reference Spectra for Photovoltaic Performance Evaluation , year =

  17. [18]

    Shockley, William and Queisser, Hans J. , doi =. Detailed Balance Limit of Efficiency of p-n Junction Solar Cells , volume =. Journal of Applied Physics , number =. 1961 , bdsk-url-1 =

    1961

  18. [19]

    and Daus, Alwin and Saraswat, Krishna C

    Nassiri Nazif, Koosha and Nitta, Frederick U. and Daus, Alwin and Saraswat, Krishna C. and Pop, Eric , doi =. Efficiency limit of transition metal dichalcogenide solar cells , volume =. Communications Physics , pages =. 2023 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2023

  19. [20]

    Bernardi, Marco and Palummo, Marco and Grossman, Jeffrey C. , doi =. Extraordinary Sunlight Absorption and One Nanometer Thick Photovoltaics Using Two-Dimensional Monolayer Materials , volume =. Nano Letters , number =. 2013 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2013

  20. [21]

    Monolithic Interface Contact Engineering to Boost Optoelectronic Performances of 2D Semiconductor Photovoltaic Heterojunctions , volume =

    Yang, Seunghoon and Cha, Janghwan and Kim, Jong Chan and Lee, Donghun and Huh, Woong and Kim, Yoonseok and Lee, Seong Won and Park, Hong-Gyu and Jeong, Hu Young and Hong, Suklyun and Lee, Gwan-Hyoung and Lee, Chul-Ho , doi =. Monolithic Interface Contact Engineering to Boost Optoelectronic Performances of 2D Semiconductor Photovoltaic Heterojunctions , vo...

    2020

  21. [22]

    Carrier multiplication in van der Waals layered transition metal dichalcogenides , volume =

    Kim, Ji-Hee and others , doi =. Carrier multiplication in van der Waals layered transition metal dichalcogenides , volume =. Nature Communications , pages =. 2019 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2019

  22. [23]

    Beard, Matthew C. , doi =. Multiple exciton generation in semiconductor quantum dots , volume =. The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters , number =. 2011 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2011

  23. [24]

    Klimov, Victor I. , doi =. Detailed-balance power conversion limits of nanocrystal-quantum-dot solar cells in the presence of carrier multiplication , volume =. Applied Physics Letters , pages =. 2006 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2006

  24. [25]

    Thermodynamic efficiency limits for semiconductor solar cells with carrier multiplication , volume =

    Brendel, Rolf and Werner, J. Thermodynamic efficiency limits for semiconductor solar cells with carrier multiplication , volume =. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells , note =

  25. [26]

    Hot carrier photovoltaics in van der Waals heterostructures , volume =

    Paul, Kamal Kumar and Kim, Ji-Hee and Lee, Young Hee , doi =. Hot carrier photovoltaics in van der Waals heterostructures , volume =. Nature Reviews Physics , pages =. 2021 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2021

  26. [27]

    Reciprocity relation between photovoltaic quantum efficiency and electroluminescent emission of solar cells , volume =

    Rau, Uwe , doi =. Reciprocity relation between photovoltaic quantum efficiency and electroluminescent emission of solar cells , volume =. Physical Review B , pages =. 2007 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2007

  27. [28]

    What Makes a Good Solar Cell? , volume =

    Kirchartz, Thomas and Rau, Uwe , doi =. What Makes a Good Solar Cell? , volume =. Advanced Energy Materials , number =. 2018 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2018

  28. [29]

    Fundamental limit of nanophotonic light trapping in solar cells , volume =

    Yu, Zongfu and Raman, Arvind and Fan, Shanhui , doi =. Fundamental limit of nanophotonic light trapping in solar cells , volume =. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , number =. 2010 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2010

  29. [30]

    Miller, David A. B. , doi =. Why optics needs thickness , volume =. Science , number =. 2023 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2023

  30. [31]

    and Heinz, Tony F

    Ruppert, Claudia and Aslan, Ozge B. and Heinz, Tony F. , doi =. Optical Properties and Band Gap of Single- and Few-Layer MoTe2 Crystals , volume =. Nano Letters , number =. 2014 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2014

  31. [32]

    Yablonovitch, Eli , title =. J. Opt. Soc. Am. , year =

  32. [33]

    and Yablonovitch, E

    Tiedje, T. and Yablonovitch, E. and Cody, G. D. and Brooks, B. G. , title =. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices , year =

  33. [34]

    , title =

    De Vos, A. , title =. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells , year =

  34. [35]

    and Sablon, K

    Sergeev, A. and Sablon, K. , title =. Phys. Rev. Applied , year =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.10.064001 , note =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.10.064001

  35. [36]

    Werner, J. H. and Brendel, R. and Queisser, H. J. , title =. Applied Physics Letters , year =

  36. [37]

    Hanna, M. C. and Nozik, A. J. , title =. Journal of Applied Physics , year =

  37. [38]

    Ross, R. T. and Nozik, A. J. , title =. Journal of Applied Physics , year =