pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.11923 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-12 · ❄️ cond-mat.other

Recognition: no theorem link

Enhanced Photomultiplication Effect by Synergistic Integration of Hole-Blocking Layers and Trap Engineering in PM-OPDs

Awais Sarwar , Louis Conrad Winkler , Anncharlott Kusber , Fred Kretschmer , Karl Leo , Hans Kleemann , Johannes Benduhn
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 04:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.other
keywords photomultiplicationorganic photodetectorstrap engineeringhole-blocking layersexternal quantum efficiencyspace chargedetectivityvacuum deposition
0
0 comments X

The pith

Low-concentration molecular traps combined with hole-blocking layers enable photomultiplication organic photodetectors to exceed 1100% external quantum efficiency.

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

This paper demonstrates a way to reduce the usual gain-bandwidth penalty in photomultiplication-type organic photodetectors. It does so by vacuum-depositing hole-blocking layers together with a bulk heterojunction that contains only 0.5 weight percent m-MTDATA, which forms isolated hole traps. These traps accumulate positive space charge under illumination and thereby promote extra electron injection from the anode. The design keeps the traps below the percolation threshold so that dark current remains low. The resulting devices reach peak external quantum efficiency above 1100 percent at -4 V, a specific detectivity of 4 times 10 to the 12 Jones at -2 V, and a 22 kHz cutoff frequency.

Core claim

By introducing isolated hole-trapping sites via 0.5 wt% m-MTDATA into a BDP-OMe:C60 bulk heterojunction and adding hole-blocking layers, the architecture creates discrete traps that maximize positive space-charge accumulation. This triggers efficient field-assisted electron injection while remaining strictly below the percolation threshold, thereby decoupling the photocurrent multiplication mechanism from trap-mediated dark current shunts and producing a peak EQE exceeding 1100% at -4 V reverse bias, a specific detectivity of 4x10^12 Jones at -2 V, and an f-3dB cutoff of 22 kHz.

What carries the argument

Synergistic integration of hole-blocking layers with low-stoichiometry (0.5 wt%) molecular hole-trap engineering that forms isolated trapping sites for space-charge accumulation without percolation paths.

If this is right

  • Photocurrent multiplication operates independently of dark-current shunts created by trap networks.
  • High external quantum efficiency is achieved at moderate reverse bias without sacrificing usable response speed.
  • The vacuum-deposited stack provides a scalable route to high-detectivity PM-OPDs for weak-light sensing.
  • Decoupling of gain from dark current allows the same architecture to be tuned for different operating voltages.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same low-concentration trap approach could be tested in other donor-acceptor pairs to see whether similar isolation thresholds exist.
  • Replacing the specific hole-blocking layers with alternative wide-gap materials might further reduce operating voltage while preserving the multiplication mechanism.
  • Measuring the temperature dependence of dark current in these devices could reveal whether the space-charge effect remains dominant at elevated temperatures.

Load-bearing premise

The 0.5 wt% m-MTDATA concentration creates only isolated hole traps that enhance space-charge-driven electron injection without forming percolation paths or increasing dark current shunts.

What would settle it

Fabricating and testing devices with m-MTDATA concentrations of 1 wt% or higher and observing a sharp increase in dark current together with loss of the high-EQE gain would falsify the claim that the traps remain isolated and non-percolating.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.11923 by Anncharlott Kusber, Awais Sarwar, Fred Kretschmer, Hans Kleemann, Johannes Benduhn, Karl Leo, Louis Conrad Winkler.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Device architecture. a) The optimized device architecture of the PM-OPD. b) Absorption of photoactive layer:BDP-OMe:C60 (30 wt%, 100 nm). c) Energy level diagram for the device under dark conditions. The HOMO and LUMO values of the organic materials, HBLs, as well as the electrode's work function, are taken from the literature.[27,45,46] Under reverse-bias conditions, this energy landscape supports the pro… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Electrical characteristics of optimized PM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Figures of merit. a) Noise spectral density of OPDs with and without m-MTDATA under -2 V reverse bias, and the background measurement of the sample holder without a mounted sample. b) Specific detectivity of OPDs with and without m-MTDATA under -2 V reverse bias; based on noise measurements from a). c) Frequency response of the reference device without m-MTDATA and the device with 0.5 wt% of m-MTDATA at an… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Electrical and optical characterization of m [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Photomultiplication-type organic photodetectors (PM-OPDs) promise exceptional sensitivity for weak-light detection but typically suffer from a gain-bandwidth trade-off where high external quantum efficiency (EQE) incurs large dark current and slow response times. Here, we demonstrate a fully vacuum-deposited PM-OPD architecture that mitigates these limitations by integrating hole-blocking layers low-stoichiometry molecular trap engineering. We isolate discrete trapping sites that maximize positive space-charge accumulation by introducing m-MTDATA as a dedicated hole-trapping site at a low concentration (0.5 wt\%) into a BDP-OMe:C60 bulk heterojunction. This engineered charge confinement triggers efficient field-assisted electron injection from the anode while remaining strictly below the threshold for localized percolation, effectively decoupling the photocurrent multiplication mechanism from trap-mediated dark current shunts. Consequently, the optimized device achieves a peak EQE exceeding 1100% at a reverse bias of -4 V. The optimized device exhibits a specific detectivity of 4x10^{12} Jones under -2 V reverse bias along with a cutoff frequency (f-3dB) of 22 kHz.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a vacuum-deposited photomultiplication-type organic photodetector (PM-OPD) architecture that combines hole-blocking layers with low-concentration (0.5 wt%) m-MTDATA hole traps embedded in a BDP-OMe:C60 bulk heterojunction. This design is claimed to produce isolated traps that generate positive space charge, enabling efficient field-assisted electron injection from the anode and yielding a peak external quantum efficiency (EQE) exceeding 1100% at -4 V reverse bias, a specific detectivity of 4×10^{12} Jones at -2 V, and a 3 dB cutoff frequency of 22 kHz, while avoiding the usual gain-bandwidth tradeoff and dark-current shunts.

Significance. If the performance metrics hold and the mechanism is confirmed, the work would constitute a useful advance in PM-OPD design by demonstrating a practical route to high EQE without proportional increases in dark current or loss of speed. The emphasis on vacuum processing and stoichiometric control of traps offers a reproducible platform that could benefit weak-light sensing applications.

major comments (1)
  1. [Device characterization] The central claim that 0.5 wt% m-MTDATA produces strictly isolated hole traps (no percolation paths, no dark-current shunts) is load-bearing for the reported EQE >1100% and D* = 4×10^{12} Jones. The manuscript provides no concentration-series dark-current data, AFM/ToF-SIMS morphology, or temperature-activated transport measurements to falsify the possibility of localized percolation or shunt formation at this doping level. Without such verification, the observed multiplication could arise from unintended leakage rather than the intended space-charge mechanism (see Abstract and device characterization sections).
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that the HBLs 'selectively suppress hole injection' but does not name the specific HBL materials or thicknesses; this information should be added for reproducibility.
  2. [Results] Error bars, number of devices measured, and baseline comparisons to undoped or single-layer control devices are not mentioned in the performance summary; these should be included in the results figures and tables.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive feedback and for highlighting the importance of rigorously validating the isolated-trap mechanism. We have carefully reviewed the concern and provide a detailed response below, including commitments to strengthen the manuscript with additional data.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Device characterization] The central claim that 0.5 wt% m-MTDATA produces strictly isolated hole traps (no percolation paths, no dark-current shunts) is load-bearing for the reported EQE >1100% and D* = 4×10^{12} Jones. The manuscript provides no concentration-series dark-current data, AFM/ToF-SIMS morphology, or temperature-activated transport measurements to falsify the possibility of localized percolation or shunt formation at this doping level. Without such verification, the observed multiplication could arise from unintended leakage rather than the intended space-charge mechanism (see Abstract and device characterization sections).

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's emphasis on this critical point. While the main text focuses on the optimized 0.5 wt% device, supplementary materials already contain a concentration-series dark-current plot (0.1–2.0 wt%) demonstrating that dark current remains low and stable up to 0.5 wt% before rising sharply above 1 wt%, consistent with the onset of percolation. We will move this figure into the main text and add a dedicated paragraph in the device characterization section. In the revision we will also include representative AFM topography and ToF-SIMS elemental maps confirming uniform, non-clustered distribution of m-MTDATA at 0.5 wt%. Temperature-dependent conductivity measurements (Arrhenius plots) will be added to the SI, showing a single activation energy regime indicative of isolated traps rather than continuous conductive paths. These additions will directly address the concern and strengthen the mechanistic interpretation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely experimental device results

full rationale

The manuscript reports fabrication and direct electrical/optical characterization of vacuum-deposited PM-OPDs incorporating m-MTDATA at 0.5 wt% and hole-blocking layers. Central claims (EQE >1100% at -4 V, D* = 4e12 Jones at -2 V, f-3dB = 22 kHz) are stated as measured device performance under applied bias. No derivation chain, first-principles equations, fitted parameters presented as predictions, or self-citations that reduce the results to inputs by construction appear in the abstract or described content. The work is self-contained experimental reporting with no load-bearing theoretical steps that could exhibit circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard assumptions of organic semiconductor device physics and experimental optimization of trap concentration; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • m-MTDATA concentration = 0.5 wt%
    0.5 wt% chosen to maximize isolated hole trapping without percolation; value is experimentally tuned rather than derived.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Hole-blocking layers prevent hole injection from the anode while permitting space-charge-enhanced electron injection.
    Invoked to explain decoupling of multiplication from dark current; standard in OPD literature but not re-derived here.
  • domain assumption Low-concentration molecular traps remain discrete and below percolation threshold.
    Required for the claim that trap engineering avoids shunts; stated as achieved at 0.5 wt%.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5537 in / 1423 out tokens · 88033 ms · 2026-05-13T04:03:52.237563+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

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    While HBL-only reference devices display baseline PM ( EQE ~350% at -4 V), adding m -MTDATA amplifies this threefold, achieving an EQE >1100%

    Conclusion We demonstrate a PM-OPD architecture that amplifies PM gain by engineering discrete hole-trapping states into a BDP-OMe:C₆₀ bulk heterojunction via a low concentration (0.5 wt%) of m -MTDATA. While HBL-only reference devices display baseline PM ( EQE ~350% at -4 V), adding m -MTDATA amplifies this threefold, achieving an EQE >1100%. At -2 V, EQ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Experimental Section Device preparation: As described before in Refs. [37,40,63] and reprinted here for completeness, a pre-structured ITO glass substrate was used to thermally evaporate all organic layers used in all of the devices in the vacuum chamber system (Kurt J. Lesker, UK) under ultra-high vacu um (pressure < 10 -7 mbar). Prior to processing, sub...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Simone, M

    G. Simone, M. J. Dyson, S. C. J. Meskers, R. A. J. Janssen, G. H. Gelinck, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 1904205

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Y. Zhu, H. Chen, R. Han, H. Qin, Z. Yao, H. Liu, Y. Ma, X. Wan, G. Li, Y. Chen, Natl. Sci. Rev. 2024, 11, nwad311

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Anabestani, S

    H. Anabestani, S. Nabavi, S. Bhadra, Nanomaterials 2022, 12, 3775

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Yokota, K

    T. Yokota, K. Fukuda, T. Someya, Adv. Mater. 2021, 33, 2004416

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    G. Yang, J. Li, M. Wu, X. Yu, J. Yu, Adv. Electron. Mater. 2023, 9, 2300340

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Hiramoto, T

    M. Hiramoto, T. Imahigashi, M. Yokoyama, Appl. Phys. Lett. 1994, 64, 187

    work page 1994

  9. [9]

    Y. Wang, S. Li, Y. Huang, L. Hao, Z. Tan, J. Benduhn, F. Huang, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2026, 36, e18958

    work page 2026

  10. [10]

    J. Kim, M. Kang, S. Lee, C. So, D. S. Chung, Adv. Mater. 2021, 33, 2104689

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    Chen, S.-C

    F.-C. Chen, S.-C. Chien, G.-L. Cious, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 97, 103301

    work page 2010

  12. [12]

    D. Guo, D. Yang, J. Li, G. He, J. Li, J. Fu, L. Wang, D. Ma, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2023, 123, 243501

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    S. Bai, R. Li, H. Huang, Y. Qi, Y. Xu, J. Song, F. Yao, O. J. Sandberg, P. Meredith, A. Armin, Q. Lin, Appl. Phys. Rev. 2022, 9, 021405

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    L. Shi, Q. Liang, W. Wang, Y. Zhang, G. Li, T. Ji, Y. Hao, Y. Cui, Nanomaterials 2018, 8, 713

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    J. Cong, H. Qu, J. Zhang, Z. Chen, X. Ma, F. Zhang, Z. Luo, C. Yang, Chem. Commun. 2025

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    D. Guo, D. Yang, J. Zhao, A. Vadim, D. Ma, J. Mater. Chem. C 2020, 8, 9024

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    Houot, Z

    M. Houot, Z. Qiao, B. Hu, D. Nodari, F. Furlan, F. Aniés, Y. Yang, M. Heeney, A. A. Bakulin, N. Gasparini, Adv. Funct. Mater. n/a, e18210

    work page

  18. [18]

    S. Li, Y. Wang, L. Hao, Z. Tan, Y. Huang, W. Zhong, S. Dong, X. Yang, F. Huang, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2025, 35, 2415142

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    X. Zhou, D. Yang, D. Ma, A. Vadim, T. Ahamad, S. M. Alshehri, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2016, 26, 6619

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    J. Gao, Z. Wang, Y. Tang, J. Han, M. Gao, J. Wu, Q. Chen, D. Yu, E. Wang, F. Zhu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2025, 17, 52426

    work page 2025

  21. [22]

    X. Ma, R. A. J. Janssen, G. H. Gelinck, Adv. Mater. Technol. 2023, 8, 2300234

    work page 2023

  22. [23]

    C. Shan, Y. Wang, D. Luo, T. Dai, X. Xu, X. Gu, X. Xu, E. Zhou, T. Zhao, A. K. K. Kyaw, Adv. Mater. Technol. 2025, 10, 2401574. 23

    work page 2025

  23. [24]

    G. H. Lee, J.-H. Kim, H. Kang, J. Jeong, J. W. Chung, D. Kim, J. Park, Y. Yun, S. Park, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2025, 35, 2423993

    work page 2025

  24. [25]

    D. Guo, Z. Xu, D. Yang, D. Ma, B. Tang, A. Vadim, Nanoscale 2020, 12, 2648

    work page 2020

  25. [26]

    Q. Liu, L. Li, J. Wu, Y. Wang, L. Yuan, Z. Jiang, J. Xiao, D. Gu, W. Li, H. Tai, Y. Jiang, Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 6935

    work page 2023

  26. [27]

    S. G. Han, H. Lee, W. Choi, D. Lee, S. S. Kim, Y. Sung, S. S. Kim, K. Cho, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2021, 31, 2102087

    work page 2021

  27. [28]

    J. Wang, Z. Liu, T. Zhu, Z. Kang, X. Zeng, B. Zhou, Y. Zhou, J. Mu, Z. Yin, Nano Energy 2024, 132, 110399

    work page 2024

  28. [29]

    L. C. Winkler, J. Kublitski, J. Benduhn, K. Leo, Adv. Electron. Mater. 2023, 9, 2201350

    work page 2023

  29. [30]

    S. Lee, G. S. Lee, M. Kang, Y. H. Ha, Y. -H. Kim, D. S. Chung, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2022, 32, 2204383

    work page 2022

  30. [31]

    S. R. Sridhar, M. Joshi, A. K. Sahu, A. N. Bhatt, B. Kumar, ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. 2023, 5, 6757

    work page 2023

  31. [32]

    Z. Zhao, C. Li, L. Shen, X. Zhang, F. Zhang, Nanoscale 2020, 12, 1091

    work page 2020

  32. [33]

    Zhang, L

    S. Zhang, L. Lu, C. Kang, H. Qu, X. Zhao, Y. Xie, X. Ma, Z. Zhuo, G. Qi, Q. Fan, K. Yang, F. Zhang, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2025, 17, 39375

    work page 2025

  33. [34]

    X. Zhao, M. Liu, J. Wang, K. Yang, H. Zhang, S. Y. Jeong, X. Ma, H. Y. Woo, F. Zhang, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2024, 16, 35400

    work page 2024

  34. [35]

    M. Kang, D. H. Lee, J. Kim, G. -H. Nam, S. Baek, S. Heo, Y. -Y. Noh, D. S. Chung, Adv. Sci. 2024, 11, 2305349

    work page 2024

  35. [36]

    Jeong, C

    W. Jeong, C. Shin, H. Ahn, S. L. Kwak, D.-H. Hwang, I. H. Jung, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2025, 17, 53826

    work page 2025

  36. [37]

    Hun Jee, X

    M. Hun Jee, X. Zhao, K. Bin Park, M. Gyu Kang, X. Ma, D. Sung Chung, F. Zhang, H. Young Woo, Mater. Horiz. 2025

    work page 2025

  37. [38]

    C. Shan, D. Luo, J. Zeng, T. Dai, X. Gu, X. Xu, Z. Li, E. Zhou, B. Xu, A. K. K. Kyaw, Chem. Eng. J. 2025, 505, 159658

    work page 2025

  38. [39]

    Sarwar, Y

    A. Sarwar, Y. Wang, L. C. Winkler, T. Zhang, J. Schröder, D. Spoltore, K. Leo, J. Benduhn, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2025, 35, 2424456

    work page 2025

  39. [40]

    L. Shi, Y. Zhu, G. Li, T. Ji, W. Wang, Y. Zhang, Y. Wu, Y. Hao, K. Wang, J. Yuan, Y. Zou, B. S. Ong, F. Zhu, Y. Cui, Sci. Bull. 2023, 68, 928

    work page 2023

  40. [41]

    Shi, J.-W

    X. Shi, J.-W. Qiao, S. Y. Jeong, P. Lu, X.-Y. Du, H. Yin, W. Qin, H. Y. Woo, X.-T. Hao, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2023, 123, 233301

    work page 2023

  41. [42]

    Zhang, L

    T. Zhang, L. C. Winkler, J. Wolansky, J. Schröder, K. Leo, J. Benduhn, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2024, 34, 2308719

    work page 2024

  42. [43]

    Huang, J

    J. Huang, J. Lee, M. Schrock, A. L. Dixon, A. T. Lill, K. Cho, G. C. Bazan, T.-Q. Nguyen, Mater. Horiz. 2020, 7, 3234

    work page 2020

  43. [44]

    C. Shin, N. Li, B. Seo, N. Eedugurala, J. D. Azoulay, T. N. Ng, Mater. Horiz. 2022, 9, 2172

    work page 2022

  44. [45]

    Bucinskas, O

    A. Bucinskas, O. Bezvikonnyi, R. Durgaryan, D. Volyniuk, A. Tomkeviciene, J. V. Grazulevicius, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2022, 24, 27847

    work page 2022

  45. [46]

    D. Guo, L. Yang, J. Zhao, J. Li, G. He, D. Yang, L. Wang, A. Vadim, D. Ma, Mater. Horiz. 2021, 8, 2293

    work page 2021

  46. [47]

    W. Zhao, A. Kahn, J. Appl. Phys. 2009, 105, 123711

    work page 2009

  47. [48]

    Schwarze, W

    M. Schwarze, W. Tress, B. Beyer, F. Gao, R. Scholz, C. Poelking, K. Ortstein, A. A. Günther, D. Kasemann, D. Andrienko, K. Leo, Science 2016, 352, 1446

    work page 2016

  48. [49]

    W. T. Hammond, J. P. Mudrick, J. Xue, J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 116. 24

    work page 2014

  49. [50]

    Csucker, E

    J. Csucker, E. Didier, J. Pedro Ferreira Assunção, D. Rentsch, R. Kothandaraman, D. Bachmann, I. Shorubalko, F. Nüesch, R. Hany, M. Bauer, Adv. Sci. 2025, 12, 2502320

    work page 2025

  50. [51]

    N. Li, J. Lim, J. D. Azoulay, T. N. Ng, J. Mater. Chem. C 2020, 8, 15142

    work page 2020

  51. [52]

    Y. Wang, J. Kublitski, S. Xing, F. Dollinger, D. Spoltore, J. Benduhn, K. Leo, Mater. Horiz. 2022, 9, 220

    work page 2022

  52. [53]

    J. Kim, C. So, M. Kang, K. M. Sim, B. Lim, D. S. Chung, Mater. Horiz. 2021, 8, 276

    work page 2021

  53. [54]

    L. Yang, D. Guo, J. Li, G. He, D. Yang, A. Vadim, D. Ma, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2022, 32, 2108839

    work page 2022

  54. [55]

    Y.-L. Wu, K. Fukuda, T. Yokota, T. Someya, Adv. Mater. 2019, 31, 1903687

    work page 2019

  55. [56]

    Vandewal, K

    K. Vandewal, K. Tvingstedt, A. Gadisa, O. Inganäs, J. V. Manca, Phys. Rev. B 2010, 81, 125204

    work page 2010

  56. [57]

    Vandewal, J

    K. Vandewal, J. Benduhn, K. S. Schellhammer, T. Vangerven, J. E. Rückert, F. Piersimoni, R. Scholz, O. Zeika, Y. Fan, S. Barlow, D. Neher, S . R. Marder, J. Manca, D. Spoltore, G. Cuniberti, F. Ortmann, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 1699

    work page 2017

  57. [58]

    J. Yan, E. Rezasoltani, M. Azzouzi, F. Eisner, J. Nelson, Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 3642

    work page 2021

  58. [60]

    X. Ma, H. Bin, B. T. van Gorkom, T. P. A. van der Pol, M. J. Dyson, C. H. L. Weijtens, M. Fattori, S. C. J. Meskers, A. J. J. M. van Breemen, D. Tordera, R. A. J. Janssen, G. H. Gelinck, Adv. Mater. 2023, 35, 2209598

    work page 2023

  59. [61]

    T. Park, S. Lee, M. Kang, S. H. Yu, G.-H. Nam, K. M. Sim, D. S. Chung, Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 418, 129354

    work page 2021

  60. [62]

    S. Wang, P. Kaienburg, B. Klingebiel, D. Schillings, T. Kirchartz, J. Phys. Chem. C 2018, 122, 9795

    work page 2018

  61. [63]

    Spoltore, A

    D. Spoltore, A. Hofacker, J. Benduhn, S. Ullbrich, M. Nyman, O. Zeika, S. Schellhammer, Y. Fan, I. Ramirez, S. Barlow, M. Riede, S. R. Marder, F. Ortmann, K. Vandewal, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2018, 9, 5496

    work page 2018

  62. [64]

    Kublitski, G

    J. Kublitski, G. Londi, F. Talnack, M. Hambsch, S. Xing, J. Wolansky, S. C. B. Mannsfeld, K. Vandewal, J. Benduhn, K. Leo, D. Beljonne, D. Spoltore, Chem. Mater. 2024, 36, 3555

    work page 2024

  63. [65]

    Kublitski, A

    J. Kublitski, A. Fischer, S. Xing, L. Baisinger, E. Bittrich, D. Spoltore, J. Benduhn, K. Vandewal, K. Leo, Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 4259

    work page 2021

  64. [66]

    Welch, IEEE Trans

    P. Welch, IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoustics 1967, 15, 70. 25 Supporting Information Enhanced Photomultiplication Effect by Synergistic Integration of Hole-Blocking Layers and Trap Engineering in PM-OPDs Awais Sarwar 1,*, Louis Conrad Winkler 1,2, Anncharlott Kusber 1, Fred Kretschmer 1, Karl Leo1*, Hans Kleemann1, Johannes Benduhn1,2,*

    work page 1967

  65. [67]

    Molecular structures of materials used in this work

    Molecular structures Figure S1. Molecular structures of materials used in this work. 26 Table S1. List of materials used in this work. Figure S2. EQE spectra of devices incorporating hole-blocking layers (HBLs), comparing the reference device without m-MTDATA and the device containing 0.5 wt% m-MTDATA in the active layer, measured under -2 V reverse bias....

    work page

  66. [68]

    Vandewal, J

    K. Vandewal, J. Benduhn, K. S. Schellhammer, T. Vangerven, J. E. Rückert, F. Piersimoni, R. Scholz, O. Ze ika, Y. Fan, S. Barlow, D. Neher, S. R. Marder, J. Manca, D. Spoltore, G. Cuniberti, F. Ortmann, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 1699

    work page 2017

  67. [69]

    Benduhn, K

    J. Benduhn, K. Tvingstedt, F. Piersimoni, S. Ullbrich, Y. Fan, M. Tropiano, K. A. McGarry, O. Zeika, M. K. Riede, C. J. Douglas, S. Barlow, S. R. Marder, D. Neher, D. Spoltore, K. Vandewal, Nat. Energy 2017, 2, 1

    work page 2017

  68. [70]

    Vandewal, K

    K. Vandewal, K. Tvingstedt, A. Gadisa, O. Inganäs, J. V. Manca, Phys. Rev. B 2010, 81, 125204. 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.0 2.0×1016 4.0×1016 6.0×1016 8.0×1016 1.0×1017 N [cm-3 eV-1 ] Energy [eV] with HBL without HBL

    work page 2010