Addressing band-edge-property spatial variations and localized-state carrier trapping and recombination in solar cell numerical modeling

Stephen Fonash; Yiming Liu

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 24 references

Addressing band-edge-property spatial variations and localized-state carrier trapping and recombination in solar cell numerical modeling

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that solar-cell modeling should include effective forces from position-dependent band-edge energies and density-of-states variations, plus full localized-state trapping and recombination, and asserts the AMPS code family…

desk verdict A competent but largely self-referential review of the AMPS modeling methodology; useful as a reference, not a research result, and the Boltzmann-statistics caveat deserves a firmer statement. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.04994 v1 pith:PHXSN4OY submitted 2019-08-14 physics.app-ph cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Yiming Liu , Stephen Fonash This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.app-phcond-mat.mtrl-sci

keywords solarcellsimulationband-edgeeffectiveforceslocalizedgapstatesShockley-Read-Hallrecombinationamphotericdefectsdrift-diffusionmodelAMPSUrbachtails

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Solar-cell devices can be shaped by two effects that most numerical simulators ignore: effective forces on carriers from spatial changes in band-edge energies and effective densities of states, and the trapping, space charge, and recombination caused by localized gap states. This paper lays out a generalized drift-diffusion formulation that puts both effects into the same Poisson-plus-continuity system, and reviews how every important class of gap state—dopants, discrete, banded, Gaussian, Urbach tails, mid-gap background states, and amphoteric dangling bonds—enters the carrier populations and recombination traffic. It then describes the numerical solution strategy used by the AMPS family of codes, which the authors state was the first to treat both classes of effects fully. If the treatment is sound, simulators that omit these effects can misjudge currents, fields, and interface recombination in exactly the structures—heterojunctions, contacts, and defect-rich absorbers—that advanced solar cells rely on.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the generalized drift-diffusion current densities, Eqs. (4)-(5), which add effective-force terms dχ/dx, d ln Nc/dx, d(χ+Eg)/dx, and d ln Nv/dx to the usual field and diffusion terms. Around these, the machinery is a catalog of occupation statistics: SRH recombination traffic (Eq. 8) and occupation probabilities for discrete, banded, Gaussian, and Urbach-tail states, plus donor/acceptor dopant statistics and amphoteric-state treatments following SRH or Sah-Shockley statistics. The numerical engine is steady-state 1-D discretization with Scharfetter-Gummel current differencing and a Newton-Raphson solve whose Jacobian is banded because each node couples only to its neighbors; the Appendix gives analytic integrals for banded states so the Jacobian derivatives can be taken without numerical quadrature.

What would settle it

Take a heavily doped or intensely illuminated device, solve the same system once with Boltzmann expressions (6)-(7) and once with Fermi-Dirac statistics, and compare the resulting J-V curves and recombination profiles; any significant difference shows the Boltzmann assumption is the limiting premise for that regime.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the paper's own terms, the central claim is that a complete numerical solar-cell model should solve Poisson's equation and the electron and hole continuity equations with current densities generalized to include effective forces from variations in χ, Eg, Nc, and Nv, and with all gap-state populations and recombination rates expressed through the same state variables ψ, Efn and Efp. The authors show the resulting system: free carriers follow Boltzmann statistics; dopant and defect states are populated through Shockley-Read-Hall traffic rather than full-ionization or linearized-lifetime assumptions; and localized states contribute both recombination and space charge to Poisson's equation. They further assert that the AMPS computer code and its derivatives were the first to implement this comprehensive treatment, and demonstrate the methodology by reviewing the discretized finite-difference equations, Scharfetter-Gummel current expressions, and Newton-Raphson solution used in that code family. The paper's stated goal is to let users compare the comprehensiveness of available programs and to provide the equations needed to include effective forces and gap-state effects in any solar-cell simulator.

Load-bearing premise

The model's accuracy rests on free carriers obeying Boltzmann statistics even at high doping or high injection; when degeneracy matters, the computed carrier densities, currents, and recombination rates would be wrong.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the treatment is correct, simulators that drop the effective-force terms can misestimate carrier currents by amounts comparable to the electrostatic force, especially at heterojunctions and contacts.
The full-ionization approximation for dopants and linearized recombination lifetimes become checkable special cases, not assumptions the model is forced to make.
Contacts and interfaces can be represented as layers with their own band-edge properties and defect distributions, so highly nonlinear contact phenomena can be included without altering the boundary-condition scheme.
The AMPS family can serve as a reference implementation for judging whether other solar-cell simulation programs cover band-edge variations and gap states comprehensively.
The Sah-Shockley treatment of amphoteric states is identified as the more precise route, with the decoupled SRH approximation adequate when the correlation energy U is much larger than kT.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Beyond this paper, the same state-variable formulation could be used to isolate when effective forces matter: run a heterojunction with the dχ/dx and d ln Nc/dx terms toggled on and off, and the difference in simulated J-V curves quantifies the error of simpler models.
Because free carriers are assumed Boltzmann, an extension to Fermi-Dirac statistics would be needed before the methodology is applied to degenerate or very high-injection devices; the paper states the assumption but does not quantify its breakdown.
The analytic band-integral technique in the Appendix looks directly transferable to other drift-diffusion solvers that currently approximate band-tail occupations by numerical quadrature, potentially improving speed and Jacobian accuracy.
One testable consequence not developed in the paper: since trapped charge enters Poisson's equation, the model should reproduce capacitance or transient photocurrent signatures of trap filling, not just steady-state recombination.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

It's a review of the AMPS family of solar cell simulators, written by the people who built AMPS. The most useful part is the systematic catalogue of gap-state types—discrete, banded, Gaussian, Urbach tails, amphoteric—and the formulas for their occupation and recombination traffic. That compilation is genuinely handy, and the analytic appendix that evaluates the banded-state integrals in closed form is the one piece of real work in the paper. If you need a one-stop summary of how a drift-diffusion code can handle effective forces and SRH-like trapping, this is a reasonable place to look.

What it is not is a new research contribution. The transport equations are standard, the SRH and Sah-Shockley results are textbook, and the numerical method (Scharfetter-Gummel plus Newton-Raphson) is classic. The paper explicitly says AMPS currently uses the decoupled SRH approximation for amphoteric states, so the Sah-Shockley treatment is described as future work, not present capability. The priority claim—that the full treatment was first done in AMPS—rests entirely on self-citation. There are no benchmarks against experimental data, no comparisons with other simulators, and no code or input files that would let a reader reproduce anything.

The stress-test note about Boltzmann statistics is fair but not fatal. Equations (6)-(7) assume Boltzmann free-carrier populations, and those populations feed every recombination and trapping term. In degenerately doped layers the assumption is wrong, and the paper doesn't state its range of validity. That undermines the phrase 'full treatment' and should be fixed. But it's a limitation that most solar cell codes share, and it doesn't invalidate the transport framework for the non-degenerate cases the paper mostly targets.

A more annoying issue is the state of the manuscript text. The equations as received are garbled in places (missing parentheses, mangled subscripts, variables swapped). Some of that may be an OCR artifact rather than the authors' fault, but it makes verification harder than it should be, and a referee would need clean typesetting before judging details.

Bottom line: this is a useful review/reference for modelers who want to understand how AMPS handles band-edge variations and gap states. It deserves peer review as a review article, but only after the authors soften the priority claim, acknowledge the Boltzmann limitation explicitly, and ideally add at least one validation example. I'd send it to a journal that publishes review papers, with instructions to require those revisions.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents a review and formal description of the numerical methodology used in the AMPS family of solar cell simulation codes. It generalizes the drift-diffusion transport equations to include effective forces arising from spatial variations in band-edge energies and effective densities of states, and it catalogues the treatment of a wide variety of localized gap states: discrete, banded, Gaussian, Urbach-tail, and amphoteric states. The model couples Poisson's equation and the continuity equations through carrier populations, trapping, and Shockley-Read-Hall recombination, and solves the resulting nonlinear system with the Newton-Raphson method using a Scharfetter-Gummel discretization. The paper asserts in the abstract and Section 1 that AMPS was the first code to fully treat band-edge-property variations together with localized-state effects, and that its implementation has been successful.

Significance. If the methodology is sound and the implementation claims are correct, this review would serve as a useful reference for understanding what a comprehensive solar cell simulation code must include, and it would document the scope of the AMPS family for users and developers. The paper usefully organizes many recombination/trapping models under one framework, and the Sah-Shockley treatment in Section 4.4.5.2 provides a concise summary of a less-common formulation. However, the paper does not present new physics, and its central claims about implementation success and historical priority rest entirely on self-citations and on equations that, as printed, contain transcription errors. The lack of any validation example or comparison to experiment or alternative codes means the significance of the claimed 'successful implementation' cannot currently be assessed from this manuscript.

major comments (4)

[Section 4.1, Eqs. (6)-(7)] The free-carrier populations are fixed to Boltzmann statistics, n = Nc exp[-(Ec-EFn)/kT] and p = Nv exp[-(EFp-Ev)/kT], and these n and p then enter the generalized current expressions in Eqs. (4)-(5) as well as every SRH, banded, Gaussian, tail, and amphoteric recombination or trapping rate. In degenerately doped regions (e.g., TCO contacts, heavily doped emitters, a-Si:H p/n layers), which are precisely the regions where band-edge-property variations can be important, Boltzmann statistics can be significantly in error and the effective-force terms involving d ln Nc/dx no longer have their Boltzmann form. The paper acknowledges the assumption but provides no validity range, no Fermi-Dirac extension, and no numerical check against Fermi-Dirac statistics. This is load-bearing for the claim of 'full treatment' in the abstract and Section 1: the comprehensiveness is not demonstrated in the degenerate regime where the band-edge effects matter most.
[Section 5, Eqs. (43)-(44) and Appendix] The discretized current expressions labelled as Scharfetter-Gummel forms are not verifiable as printed. Equation (43) appears to multiply two exponential differences by a prefactor without the Bernoulli-function or flux-conservation structure of the standard Scharfetter-Gummel scheme, and the signs in the exponentials are missing or inconsistent (e.g., the second exponential difference has no minus sign on the energy variable). Equation (44) has analogous issues. The Appendix (Eqs. (A1)-(A4)) introduces c1, c2, and σ without clean definitions and presents integral results whose derivation and domain of validity (e.g., the conditions D=0, D>0, D<0) are not explained. Because the paper claims to demonstrate successful implementation via this discretization, these equations must be corrected and made checkable before the central claim can be accepted.
[Abstract and Section 1] The abstract states 'The successful implementation of the numerical modeling of band-edge-property variations and defect state effects is demonstrated,' and Section 1 claims that 'The full treatment ... was first done in AMPS.' However, the manuscript contains no simulation results, no convergence tests, no comparison to experimental data, and no benchmark against other codes or analytic limits. The demonstration consists only of presenting the equations and asserting that AMPS implements them, with the implementation claims citing the authors' own prior work (refs. [2]-[6]). As it stands, the paper is a methodology review, not a demonstration. Either add a representative validation example (e.g., a simulated a-Si:H cell with band tails and amphoteric states compared to experiment or to an independent solver) or explicitly reframe the contribution as a review of the AMPS formulation without claiming demonstrated success.
[Section 4.4.5.2] There is an internal inconsistency in the comprehensiveness claim. Section 1 says AMPS provides 'the full treatment' of localized-state effects, but Section 4.4.5.2 states that 'Currently AMPS and its derivatives use the SRH method' for amphoteric states and that the precise Sah-Shockley model 'is intended to be incorporated in later versions.' The paper itself notes in Section 4.4.5.1 that the decoupled SRH approximation 'could result in some degree of error' and cites articles discussing that inaccuracy. The manuscript should explicitly state, in the abstract and conclusions, that the current AMPS implementation treats amphoteric states within the SRH approximation, and should either justify the approximation for the targeted materials or present the Sah-Shockley form as an extension not yet implemented.

minor comments (5)

[Throughout] Please correct typographical and transcription errors that make the text hard to read: 'respectfully' should be 'respectively' (Section 3), 'radioactive' should be 'radiative' (Section 4.2), and several equations have garbled subscripts and superscripts (e.g., N_DD, N_BD, N_CTi are not consistently typeset).
[Section 4.4.5.1 and Figure 3] The discussion of the SRH approximation for amphoteric states relies on Figures 1-3, but in the provided manuscript the figures are separated from the text and not explicitly referenced within the relevant sections. Please ensure each figure is called out where it is first discussed and that the captions explain the symbols (e.g., E, E+U, F+, F0, F-).
[Section 2, Eq. (1)] The sign of the space-charge term in Poisson's equation is written in a compressed way that is easy to misread. It would help to write Poisson's equation explicitly as d/dx(ε dψ/dx) = -q(p - n + Nd+ - Na- + pt - nt) or with an equivalent unambiguous sign convention.
[Section 4.1] The text says 'we will see that the Boltzmann formulation is not used to determine the populations Nd+, Na-, pt and nt' but this point is not explicitly revisited later. A sentence in Sections 4.2 or 4.3 confirming that the occupation probabilities fA(E) and fD(E) are used (which incorporate Fermi-Dirac-like statistics through the SRH rates) would remove ambiguity.
[References] The historical priority claim in Section 1 ('first done in AMPS') would be more persuasive if the authors acknowledged or compared with other simulation packages that also include band-edge and gap-state effects (e.g., SCAPS, ASA), even if only to explain differences in scope or chronology.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Priority and comprehensiveness claims for AMPS rest on self-citations, but the device-physics equations themselves are independently grounded.

self citation load bearing [Section 1 (Introduction), paragraph 3]
"The full treatment of the impact of both band-edge-property variations and localized states was first done in the Analysis of Microelectronic and Photonic Structures (AMPS) computer code [2-4] and this comprehensive treatment is also found in the several AMPS derivatives now in use [5, 6]."

The paper's central claim—that AMPS and its derivatives provide the first and comprehensive numerical treatment of band-edge variations plus localized states, and that this implementation is 'successful'—is supported by references [2]-[4] (McElheny/Arch/Lin/Fonash; Zhu/Fonash; Zhu et al., all with author Fonash) and [6] (Liu et al., co-author Liu). No derivation or external benchmark in this paper independently establishes 'first' or validates 'successful.' The priority and comprehensiveness assertion therefore reduces to the authors' own prior publications.

full rationale

This paper is primarily a review of the AMPS simulation methodology by the code's developers rather than a new derivation. The governing equations—drift-diffusion with effective forces, SRH recombination, dopant/discrete/banded/Gaussian/Urbach-tail/amphoteric state statistics, and Scharfetter-Gummel discretization—are rooted in standard semiconductor physics and are cited to external or textbook sources. The Boltzmann free-carrier assumption (Eqs. 6-7) is explicitly acknowledged and is a correctness/validity concern, not a circularity. The one genuinely load-bearing circular element is the priority claim that AMPS 'first' implemented the full treatment and that its derivatives are 'comprehensive'; this is supported only by self-citations and is not demonstrated with independent benchmarks in this paper. Because that claim is central to the abstract and introduction but the scientific content retains independent grounding, a score of 4 is appropriate rather than a higher score reserved for derivations that reduce entirely to fits or self-citation chains.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper is a review of existing modeling methodology. It introduces no free parameters fitted to data and no new physical entities. The central claim rests on standard semiconductor-device axioms (steady state, 1D, drift-diffusion, SRH statistics) and on empirical assumptions about defect distributions, all stated in the text.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Steady-state, one-dimensional device domain with metal contacts at both boundaries.
The governing equations (1)-(3) and boundary conditions in Section 2 are formulated for steady-state, 1D structures terminated by metal contacts; this excludes transient and multidimensional effects.
domain assumption Drift-diffusion transport is valid when carrier mean free path is smaller than device dimensions.
Section 2 states this validity condition; the generalized drift-diffusion current expressions (4) and (5) rely on it.
domain assumption Free carriers obey Boltzmann statistics; gap states use more general statistics.
Section 4.1 gives n and p via Boltzmann expressions (6) and (7), while gap-state populations use SRH or Sah-Shockley statistics; this may break down for degenerate carrier populations.
domain assumption Recombination through localized states is described by Shockley-Read-Hall (SRH) statistics.
Section 4.2 presents the SRH rate for defect-assisted recombination and uses it throughout for discrete, banded, Gaussian, and tail states.
domain assumption Band tails are exponential (Urbach) distributions with fitting parameters NCT0, Ea, NVT0, Ed.
Section 4.4.4 assumes exponential decay of band tail states into the gap; this is an empirical form, not derived here.
domain assumption Amphoteric states are represented with two transition levels separated by a positive correlation energy U.
Section 4.4.5 postulates the two-level amphoteric model and the equilibrium occupation formulas (34)-(35); the correlation energy U is a model input.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Addressing band-edge-property spatial variations and localized-state carrier trapping and recombination in solar cell numerical modeling." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PHXSN4OY

@misc{pith2026190804994,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Addressing band-edge-property spatial variations and localized-state carrier trapping and recombination in solar cell numerical modeling},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PHXSN4OY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.04994}
}

read the original abstract

Conduction and valence band-edge-property variations with position as well as defects giving rise to localized states in the energy gap can play a significant role in determining solar cell performance. Understanding their effects on a device is necessary in interpreting complex experimental observations and in optimizing the performance of solar cells. In this overview, we include the effective forces arising from electron and hole band-edge-property variations with position in a numerical formulation of solar cell performance. Further we systematically catalogue and review a variety of localized states with different types and distributions, and include in our numerical transport model the carrier trapping, electric field modification, and recombination caused by these localized states. The successful implementation of the numerical modeling of band-edge-property variations and defect state effects is demonstrated using the methodology of the solar cell simulation code Analysis of Microelectronic and Photonic Structures (AMPS) and its derivatives.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.04994 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Band tail defect states and background Mid-gap states [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

[2]

Range of validity of the surface-photovoltage diffusion length measurement: A computer simulation

P . J. McElheny, J. K. Arch, H.-S. Lin, and S. J. Fonash, "Range of validity of the surface-photovoltage diffusion length measurement: A computer simulation", Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 64, pp. 1254-1265, 1988

work page 1988
[6]

A new simulation software of solar cells--wxAMPS

Y . Liu, Y . Sun, and A. Rockett, "A new simulation software of solar cells--wxAMPS", Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, 2011

work page 2011
[1]

S. J. Fonash, Solar Cell Device Physics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2010

work page 2010
[3]

Computer Simulation for Solar Cell Applications: Understanding and Design

H. Zhu and S. J. Fonash, "Computer Simulation for Solar Cell Applications: Understanding and Design", Proceedings of the Symposium, San Francisco, CA, pp. 395-402, 1998

work page 1998
[4]

Applications of AMPS-1D for solar cell simulation

H. Zhu, A. K. Kalkan, J. Hou, and S. J. Fonash, "Applications of AMPS-1D for solar cell simulation", in National center for photovoltaics (NCPV) 15th program review meeting, Denver, Colorado (USA), 1999, pp. 309-314

work page 1999
[5]

Microcrystalline n-i-p tunnel junction in a-Si:H/a-Si:H tandem cells

F. A. Rubinelli, J. K. Rath, and R. E. I. Schropp, "Microcrystalline n-i-p tunnel junction in a-Si:H/a-Si:H tandem cells", Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 89, pp. 4010-4018, 2001

work page 2001
[7]

Collection efficiency of a‐Si:H Schottky barriers: A computer study of the sensitivity to material and device parameters

P . J. McElheny, P. Chatterjie, and S. J. Fonash, "Collection efficiency of a‐Si:H Schottky barriers: A computer study of the sensitivity to material and device parameters", J. Appl. Phys, vol. 69, pp. 7674-7688, 1991. 17

work page 1991
[8]

Statistics of the Recombinations of Holes and Electrons

W. Shockley and W. T. Read, "Statistics of the Recombinations of Holes and Electrons", Physical Review, vol. 87, pp. 835-842, 1952

work page 1952

Show all 24 references

[9]

Electron-Hole Recombination in Germanium

R. N. Hall, "Electron-Hole Recombination in Germanium", Physical Review, vol. 87, pp. 387-387, 1952

1952
[10]

A Manual for AMPS-1D for Windows 95/NT,

S. Fonash, "A Manual for AMPS-1D for Windows 95/NT," The Pennsylvania State University,1997. Available at http://www.ampsmodeling.org

1997
[11]

M. Z. Ruud E.I. Schropp, Amorphous and Microcrystalline Silicon Solar Cells: Modeling, Materials and Device Technology (Electronic Materials: Science & Technology) Springer, 1998

1998
[12]

One-Dimensional Electro-Optical Simulations of Thin-Film Solar Cells,

B. E. Pieters, K. Decock, M. Burgelman, R. Stangl, and T. Kirchartz, "One-Dimensional Electro-Optical Simulations of Thin-Film Solar Cells," in Advanced Characterization Techniques for Thin Film Solar Cells, D. Abou-Ras, T. Kirchartz, and U. Rau, Eds., ed: WILEY-VCH, 2011

2011
[13]

STATISTICS OF RECOMBINATION VIA DANGLING BONDS IN AMORPHOUS SILICON

V. Halpern, "STATISTICS OF RECOMBINATION VIA DANGLING BONDS IN AMORPHOUS SILICON", Philosophical Magazine B: Physics of Condensed Matter; Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Properties, vol. 54, pp. 473-482, 1986

1986
[14]

Can a multivalent defect be mimicked by several Shockley--Read--Hall-like defects?

K. Decock, S. Khelifi, and M. Burgelman, "Can a multivalent defect be mimicked by several Shockley--Read--Hall-like defects?", Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 108, p. 063707, 2010

2010
[15]

Photovoltaic performance of a-Si:H homojunction p-i-n solar cells: A computer simulation study

P . Chatterjee, "Photovoltaic performance of a-Si:H homojunction p-i-n solar cells: A computer simulation study", Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 76, pp. 1301-1313, 1994

1994
[16]

Simulation of hetero-junction silicon solar cells with AMPS-1D

N. Hernández-Como and A. Morales-Acevedo, "Simulation of hetero-junction silicon solar cells with AMPS-1D", Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, vol. 94, pp. 62-67, 2010

2010
[17]

Modelling of amorphous silicon single- and multi-junction solar cells,

J. A. Willemen, "Modelling of amorphous silicon single- and multi-junction solar cells," Ph.D. thesis, Delft University of Technology, 1998

1998
[18]

Errors introduced in a-Si:H-based solar cell modeling when dangling bonds are approximated by decoupled states

E. Klimovsky, J. K. Rath, R. E. I. Schropp, and F. A. Rubinelli, "Errors introduced in a-Si:H-based solar cell modeling when dangling bonds are approximated by decoupled states", Thin Solid Films, vol. 422, pp. 211-219, 2002

2002
[19]

Electron-Hole Recombination Statistics in Semiconductors through Flaws with Many Charge Conditions

C.-T. Sah and W. Shockley, "Electron-Hole Recombination Statistics in Semiconductors through Flaws with Many Charge Conditions", Physical Review, vol. 109, pp. 1103-1115, 1958

1958
[20]

Modelling multivalent defects in thin film solar cells

K. Decock, S. Khelifi, and M. Burgelman, "Modelling multivalent defects in thin film solar cells", Thin Solid Films, vol. 519, p. 4, 2011

2011
[21]

Electronic behaviors of the gap states in amorphous semiconductors

H. Okamoto and Y . Hamakawa, "Electronic behaviors of the gap states in amorphous semiconductors", Solid State Communications, vol. 24, pp. 23-27, 1977

1977
[22]

Numerical Analysis for Semiconductor Devices

M. Kurata, "Numerical Analysis for Semiconductor Devices ", Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, 1982

1982
[23]

Large-signal analysis of a silicon Read diode oscillator

D. L. Scharfetter and H. K. Gummel, "Large-signal analysis of a silicon Read diode oscillator", Electron Devices, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 16, pp. 64-77, 1969

1969
[24]

Selberherr, Analysis and simulation of semiconductor devices: Springer-Verlag, 1984

S. Selberherr, Analysis and simulation of semiconductor devices: Springer-Verlag, 1984. 18 Figure 1. A Gaussian density of states versus energy distribution centered at energy EGD. N(E) stands for the density of states per energy. The band Nj is an example of an energy band of...

1984

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [2]

Range of validity of the surface-photovoltage diffusion length measurement: A computer simulation

P . J. McElheny, J. K. Arch, H.-S. Lin, and S. J. Fonash, "Range of validity of the surface-photovoltage diffusion length measurement: A computer simulation", Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 64, pp. 1254-1265, 1988

work page 1988

[2] [6]

A new simulation software of solar cells--wxAMPS

Y . Liu, Y . Sun, and A. Rockett, "A new simulation software of solar cells--wxAMPS", Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, 2011

work page 2011

[3] [1]

S. J. Fonash, Solar Cell Device Physics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2010

work page 2010

[4] [3]

Computer Simulation for Solar Cell Applications: Understanding and Design

H. Zhu and S. J. Fonash, "Computer Simulation for Solar Cell Applications: Understanding and Design", Proceedings of the Symposium, San Francisco, CA, pp. 395-402, 1998

work page 1998

[5] [4]

Applications of AMPS-1D for solar cell simulation

H. Zhu, A. K. Kalkan, J. Hou, and S. J. Fonash, "Applications of AMPS-1D for solar cell simulation", in National center for photovoltaics (NCPV) 15th program review meeting, Denver, Colorado (USA), 1999, pp. 309-314

work page 1999

[6] [5]

Microcrystalline n-i-p tunnel junction in a-Si:H/a-Si:H tandem cells

F. A. Rubinelli, J. K. Rath, and R. E. I. Schropp, "Microcrystalline n-i-p tunnel junction in a-Si:H/a-Si:H tandem cells", Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 89, pp. 4010-4018, 2001

work page 2001

[7] [7]

Collection efficiency of a‐Si:H Schottky barriers: A computer study of the sensitivity to material and device parameters

P . J. McElheny, P. Chatterjie, and S. J. Fonash, "Collection efficiency of a‐Si:H Schottky barriers: A computer study of the sensitivity to material and device parameters", J. Appl. Phys, vol. 69, pp. 7674-7688, 1991. 17

work page 1991

[8] [8]

Statistics of the Recombinations of Holes and Electrons

W. Shockley and W. T. Read, "Statistics of the Recombinations of Holes and Electrons", Physical Review, vol. 87, pp. 835-842, 1952

work page 1952