Open Access
Add to BibSonomy
Abstract
Organic-inorganic hybrid perovskite solar cells (PSCs) are promising candidates for next-generation photovoltaics due to their excellent optoelectronic properties and process compatibility. In this report, numerical simulations show the effect of perovskite surface defect density on the inverted MAPbI3 perovskite device. The Phenethylammonium bromide (PEABr) is introduced to passivate the MAPbI3 layer surface of the perovskite solar cell devices, PEA+ diffuses into the grain boundaries of the 3D perovskite to form 2D/3D hybrid structure during the thermal annealing process, thus improve the surface morphology and decrease the interface defects between MAPbI3 layer and PCBM layer. The power conversion efficiency (PCE) of the PSCs increased from 17.95% to 19.24% after PEABr treatment. In addition, the 2D/3D hybrid structure can also hinder the intrusion of water and oxygen, the stability of perovskite devices has been greatly improved.
© 2022 Optica Publishing Group under the terms of the Optica Open Access Publishing Agreement
1. Introduction
Organic-inorganic hybrid perovskites have attracted tremendous attraction due to their low exciton binding energy, high absorption coefficient, long diffusion length, and tunable bandgap [1–6]. In the past decade, the power conversion efficiency (PCE) of n-i-p perovskite solar cells (PSCs) has increased rapidly from 3.8% to 25.7%, which is comparable with the traditional silicon-based solar cells [7–10]. Although, the n-i-p perovskite solar cell device has higher efficiencies, its complicated preparation process and obvious hysteresis effect drive the researcher to explore the other feasible device structure. The p-i-n perovskite devices use Poly[bis(4-phenyl) (2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)amine] (PTAA), NiOx, or poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene):poly(styrenesulfonate) (PEDOT:PSS) as the bottom hole transport layer, and have the advantages of low-temperature fabrication, negligible hysteresis effect, and compatibility with multi-junction cells [11–13]. The perovskite films through the low-temperature solution spin-coating method inevitably contain defects at the perovskite/electron transport layer (ETL) interface, which form non-radiative recombination centers and ion migration channels, eventually cause damage to the PCE and stability [14–17]. Therefore, it is significant to utilize surface passivation to decrease the interface defects, thus increase the p-i-n perovskite solar cell performance.
The interface of perovskite and charge transport layer (CTL) can be optimized with some polymers, dipole molecules or 2D/3D hybrid structure [18–26]. The 2D/3D hybrid perovskite solar cells combine both the benefits of 2D and 3D perovskite materials, emerging out as a more competitive candidate. The 3D perovskite acts as the main light absorber to ensure high device efficiency, and the thin hydrophobic 2D perovskite film covering on the 3D perovskite layer can effectively reduce the interfacial defects while hindering the migration of ions in the 3D perovskite. Phenethylammonium iodide (PEAI) is a commonly used organic large cation for the preparation of 2D/3D perovskites. Sargent et al. added PEAI into the antisolvent to passivate the surface and grain boundaries defects of the perovskite films, which avoids excessive 2D perovskite hindering the transport of carriers [22]. Mai et al. reported a strain compensation strategy of simultaneously annealing PCBM and PEAI to form a 2D/3D structure, which effectively reduced the interface defects causing non-radiative recombination [23]. However, the 2D/3D hybrid perovskite structure with Phenethylammonium bromide (PEABr) are rarely reported. The reaction between PEABr and excess PbBr2 can form a 2D PEA2PbBr4 perovskite phase, which can slow down the degradation of FAPbBr3 perovskite and passivate defects, so the fill factor (FF) and long-term stability of the PEABr-modified devices were improved [25]. Yu et al. used the PEABr to passivate hole transport layer (HTL)/perovskite interface, and the PCE of the inverted PSCs treated with PEABr reaches 19.46% [26]. Therefore, it is worth using PEABr to passivate the peroskite/ETL interface in the inverted p-i-n solar cell devices to improve their performance.
In this work, we simulate the effect of perovskite/ETL interface defects on the performance of the inverted MAPbI3 PSCs. We experimentally adopted the dynamic spin-coating method to deposite PEABr as the MAPbI3/PCBM interface passivator, confirming that the forming of a 2D/3D hybrid structure. The 2D/3D hybrid structure formed after thermal annealing can fill the perovskite particle gap and passivate the suspension bond located at the perovskite grain boundary. Since the defects at the perovskite/PCBM interface are passivated and the non-radiative recombination is suppressed, the FF of the inverted device treated with PEABr is significantly improved compared to the control device. And the PCE of the PEABr-treated devices increased from 17.95% to 19.24%. In addition, the 2D/3D hybrid structure can act as a barrier on the surface of perovskite, preventing water and oxygen erosion, the PEABr-treated devices could maintain 83% of the initial PCE after being stored for 30 days in a glovebox.
2. Experimental section
2.1 Device fabrication
The ITO glass was cleaned with detergent, deionized water, acetone, and anhydrous ethanol sequentially for 15 min. The clean ITO glass was placed in an oven working at 100 °C for 30 min to remove residual solvent. The pretreated ITO glass was treated with UV-ozone for 15 min. PTAA with a concentration of 5 mg/mL dissolved in chlorobenzene was spin-coated on the substrate at 4500 rpm for 30 s and annealed at 105 °C for 10 min. To improve the wettability of PTAA, we used toluene for surface modification of PTAA [27]. The perovskite precursor solution was prepared by dissolving 1.25 M MAI and PbI2 into DMF, and stirred at 70 °C under a nitrogen atmosphere for 12 h [28]. The perovskite precursor solution was spin-coated onto the substrate at 1000 rpm for 15 s and 5000 rpm for 25 s. 150 μL chlorobenzene was dripped 21 s prior to the end of spin-coating, followed by annealing at 100 °C for 10 min. For PEABr-treated devices, 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 mg of PEABr were dissolved in isopropanol to obtain PEABr solution, and then PEABr solution was dynamically spin-coated at 4000 rpm for 30 s, annealed at 100 °C for 5 min. PC61BM (20 mg/mL in chlorobenzene) was spin-coated on the perovskite layer at 3000 rpm for 30 s. 0.5 mg/mL Bphen in ethanol was spin-coated on PC61BM layer at 6000 rpm for 40 s and annealed at 60 °C for 10 min. Finally, the silver electrodes were thermally evaporated in an evaporation chamber of 4 × 10−4 Pa.
2.2 Device and film characterization
The current density-voltage (J-V) curves were measured using a solar simulator (Newport, Oriel Class AAA) with a source-measure unit (Keithley 2400) at 100 mW/cm2, and a certified AM 1.5 G illumination source was calibrated by a standard Si-reference cell system from the NREL. And the active area of perovskite solar cells is 0.0625 cm-2. X-ray diffraction (XRD) pattern of as-prepared perovskite film was recorded by using a Rigaku Ultima IV X-ray Diffractometer with Cu Kα radiation (λ=1.54060 Å) at an acquisition rate of 2 ◦/min to measure the crystal structure properties. The valence state of the perovskite film was studied by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, Thermo ESCALAB 250Xi). The absorption spectra was measured by a Hitachi UV-Vis spectrophotometer U-4100 at room temperature. The perovskite film morphology was characterized by a scanning electron microscope (SEM, ZEISS, Supra 55). Atomic force microscopy (AFM) images were measured by Bruker Dimension Icon. The steady-state PL spectra was obtained by using a 325 nm spectrometer in a dark condition. Time resolved photoluminescence (TRPL) was measured by an Edinburgh FLS1000 spectrometer.
3. Results and discussion
SCAPS-1D (Solar Cell Capacitance Simulator) software was used to simulate the performance of the perovskite solar devices at room temperature (300 K), AM 1.5G solar spectrum and light irradiation with an incident power of 100 mW/cm2. Device simulation parameters are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. The inverted MAPbI3 PSCs simulation parameters.
In our inverted p-i-n MAPbI3 solar cell devices, PTAA and PCBM were chosen as HTM and ETL layer, respectively, as shown the device structure in Fig. 1(a). We simulated the change of the MAPbI3/PCBM interface defect state density (NIL) between 1 × 10+14 cm-2 and 1 × 10+17 cm-2 in the photovoltaic performance of PSCs. The J-V curves and photovoltaic parameters of the simulated devices are shown in Fig. 1(b) and Table 2. The results demonstrate that the FF increases from 74.49% to 78.52%, and the PCE increases from 17.40% to 20.32% when NIL decreases from 1 × 10+17 cm-2 to 1 × 10+14 cm-2. This indicates that the reduction of interfacial defect state density helps to reduce interfacial recombination and improve the FF of the device.
Fig. 1. (a) Schematic of the simulated inverted MAPbI3 PSCs. (b) Simulated J-V curves of simulated devices.
Table 2. Photovoltaic parameters of PSCs with different interface defect densities.
It is well known that the perovskite surface defects can be decreased by surface passivation. Here, we experimentally employed a dynamic spin-coating PEABr layer to passivate the perovskite surface defects. Figure 2 shows the dynamic spin-coating method of PEABr. First, a one-step antisolvent spin-coating method was used to form MAPbI3 perovskite thin films on the substrate, and then annealed at 100 ℃ to turn it into black perovskite phase. The PEABr solution was further dripped on the MAPbI3 perovskite film substrate when the substrate is spinning at 4000 rpm and then thermally annealed at 100 ℃ for 5 minutes. The surface morphology was investigated by SEM. Figures 3(a-b) show the top-view SEM images of the perovskite films with and without PEABr treatment. In Figs. 3(c–d), the AFM images show that the root means square (RMS) roughness of the perovskite film is reduced from 17.3 nm to 16.2 nm after PEABr treatment, indicating that the perovskite surface morphology is smoother, which is attributed to the PEABr can fill the perovskite grain boundary gaps during thermal annealing. The better surface morphology can facilitate the interfacial contact between the perovskite and the electron transport layer.
Fig. 3. Top-view SEM images of perovskite film (a) without and (b) with PEABr. AFM images of perovskite film (c) without and (d) with PEABr.
The XRD patterns of the perovskite films with and without PEABr treatment were investigated. In Fig. 4(a), the XRD diffraction peaks of the perovskite films are mainly 14.3°, 20.1°, 23.6°, 24.6°, 28.6°, and 32.1°, which correspond to the (110), (112), (211), (202), (220), and (310) crystal planes of the perovskite MAPbI3 structure, respectively [26,28]. The diffraction peak intensity of the (110) crystal plane is enhanced after PEABr treatment, which indicates that PEABr improves the crystal orientation of the perovskite. In addition, we investigated the effect of PEABr treatment on the crystallinity of perovskite films. The FWHM of the PEABr-treated perovskite film is 0.1524, corresponding to the diffraction peak of the (110) crystal plane, which is smaller than that of the control film of 0.1917. Accoding to the Scherrer formula [35,36], the sharper diffraction peaks indicates that PEABr-treated perovskite films have good crystallinity. The XRD peaks of 2D perovskite are not observed due to very low concentration of the PEABr [26,37,38]. To magnify the intensity of 2D perovskite, we spin coating higher concentration PEABr onto MAPbI3 films, the peak from 2D perovskite becomes stronger as the amount of PEABr increased as shown in Fig. 4(b). It indicates the formation of a 2D/3D hybrid structure [39,40].
Fig. 4. (a) XRD patterns of the perovskite films with and without PEABr treatment. (b) XRD patterns of perovskite films treated with different concentration PEABr in low angle. XPS spectra of with and without PEABr-treated perovskite films for (c) C 1s (d) Pb 4f.
The chemical composition on the PEABr/ MAPbI3 film surface were analyzed with XPS. Figures 4(c-d) show the detailed XPS signals on C 1s and Pb 4f orbits. For the C 1s XPS spectrum, C-C (284.8 eV) and C-N (286.1 eV) bonds can be detected, and the intensity of the signal at 286.1 eV slightly increased with PEABr treatment, which implied the existence of PEABr on the surface of the perovskite. For the 3D perovskite film, a C = O band is observed that may formed by the oxygen oxidation of MA cations when exposed to air. By comparison, the C = O bond is absent in XPS for the samples of PEABr-treated perovskite film, indicating a better oxygen tolerance of the 2D/3D hybrid structure. The signal of Pb 4f shows a slight shift toward a higher binding energy for the perovskite film after PEABr treatment, as shown in Fig. 4(d), indicating that PEABr interacts with Pb atoms. These results imply the 2D perovskite formation, hindering the entry of water and oxygen into the interior of perovskite leads to degradation.
To investigate the effect of PEABr treatment on the optical properties of perovskite films, we performed UV-Vis absorption spectroscopy characterization of PEABr-treated perovskite films with different concentrations, as shown in Fig. 5(a). In the range of 400-580 nm, the absorption of perovskite films increased with the concentration of PEABr, and the absorption of perovskite films reaches the maximum when the concentration of PEABr is 0.5 mg/ml, which was consistent with the optimized device concentration below. The enhanced absorption may caused by the increased crystallinity, which is beneficial to the collection and utilization of light [41]. The semiconductor bandgap calculated from the absorption spectra using a tauc plot is presented in Fig. 5(b) by the tauc equation [42]. It can be found that low concentration PEABr treatment has no impact on the bandgap of the perovskite film, and its Eg is still about 1.60 eV.
Fig. 5. Perovskite films treated with different concentrations of PEABr (a) UV-Vis absorption spectrum; (b) Tauc plot; (c) Steady-state PL spectra and (d) TRPL decay curves and the corresponding fitting curves. Dark J−V curve of the hole-only devices (e) without and (f) with PEABr trearment.
In addition, the carrier dynamics were investigated by steady-state PL and TRPL characterization of MAPbI3 films to further evaluate the passivation effect of PEABr treatment on MAPbI3 films. The steady-state PL spectra of the perovskite films reveal the strong passivation effect of PEABr on the perovskite films. Compared with the perovskite film without PEABr treatment, the PL intensity of the PEABr-treated perovskite film is four times higher and the peak position of the PEABr-treated perovskite film appeared blue-shifted, which indicates that the defects on the surface of the perovskite film are suppressed [43]. We speculate that during the thermal annealing process of PEABr, the PEA+ diffuses into the grain boundaries of the perovskite, forming a 2D/3D hybrid structure, which passivates the defects on the surface and grain boundaries of the perovskite film [26]. The TRPL spectra of the perovskite films in Fig. 5(d) shows typical double exponential decay process [44]:
where τ1 is the fast decay time associated with trap-assisted recombination, τ2 is the slow decay time associated with radiative recombination, A1 and A2 are the corresponding relative amplitudes, and y0 is a constant. The average carrier decay lifetime (τavg) is estimated according to the following formula:Table 3. Summary of the TRPL parameters of the perovskite films with and without PEABr treatment.
To quantify the effect of the perovskite interface trap passivation by PEABr, we performed space charge limited current (SCLC) measurements with hole-only device, as shown in Figs. 5(e-f). The dark J-V curve mainly shows the Ohmic region where the current increases slowly and linearly at low voltage, and in the trap-filled limit region the current increases rapidly. The voltage at the intersection of the Ohmic and trap-filled limit stages is named as the trap-filled limit voltage (VTFL). In this case, the trap density (Ntrap) of perovskite films can be calculated using the following formula [23]:
where ε0 is the vacuum permittivity, εr is the relative dielectric constant of the perovskite layer, VTFL is the trap-filled limit voltage, e is the elementary charge, and L is the thickness of the perovskite layer. It is observed that the VTFL for the hole-only devices with and without PEABr treatment are 0.727 V and 1.276 V, respectively. The corresponding Ntrap values are 3.88 × 10+15 cm-3 and 6.82 × 10+15 cm-3,respectively. We consider that the SCLC measurement can only roughly estimate the trend of defect reduction, and cannot accurately measure the interface defects of the inverted device, resulting in the inconsistency between the defect density measured by SCLC and the numerical simulation. The result further reveals that the 2D/3D hybrid structure can decrease the defects in perovskite film, which is benifical to the performance improvement of the perovskite solar cells.We fabricated planar inverted PSCs with the configuration of ITO/PTAA/MAPbI3/PEABr /PCBM/Bphen/Ag, and the cross-sectional SEM image of the perovskite device structure is shown in Fig. 6(a). The J–V curves of the champion devices are shown in Fig. 6(b), and the photovoltaic parameters of devices are summarized in Table 4. The champion control device exhibits a Voc of 1.039 V, a Jsc of 23.84 mA/cm2, and a FF of 72.46%, yielding a PCE of 17.95% in the reverse scan direction. The PEABr-treated device achieved a Voc of 1.022 V, a Jsc of 24.00 mA/cm2, and an FF of 78.36%, yielding the highest PCE of 19.24% when the passivation concentration is 0.5 mg/mL. We found that the FF of PEABr-treated devices is significantly improved, which is attributed to the reduced defects of the perovskite surface and grain boundaries, and suppressed the carrier recombination at the MAPbI3/PCBM interface. Figure 6(c) presents the J-V curves of devices measured using both the reverse and forward scans directions. It should be noted that the PEABr-treated device shows very little hysteresis, which maybe because the PEABr treatment effectively suppresses the ion migration [45]. To visualize the universality of the performance improvement, the PCE statistical distribution histograms of control and PEABr-treated devices in 80 cells were obtained as shown in Fig. 6(d). The average PCE 16.78% for PEABr-treated devices was significantly higher than 15.14% of control devices, confirming that PEABr treatment can effectively passivate inverted PSCs with good reproducibility.
Fig. 6. (a) The cross-sectional SEM images of the PSCs. (b) J-V curves of different concentrations of PEABr devices. (c) J-V curves of the devices with and without PEABr treatment under reverse and forward scans. (d) Statistics of the PCE distribution of control (80 devices) and PEABr-treated devices (80 devices) under reverse scan.
Table 4. Photovoltaic parameters of PSCs modified with different concentrations of PEABr
In addition, we also tested the stability of the perovskite films under ambient conditions with a relative humidity of 60∼80% in Fig. 7(a). We observed that the perovskite film without PEABr showed a yellow phase after 8 days, which was account for the degradation of the perovskite MAPbI3 due to moisture intrusion in the air, resulting in the appearance of yellow PbI2. However, the PEABr-treated perovskite film only found a yellow phase at the edge after 8 days, which may be because the 2D/3D hybrid structure introduced by PEABr hinders the intrusion of water. As shown in Fig. 7(b), we stored the two unpackaged devices in a glove box filled with N2. After 30 days of storage, the PCE of the inverted device treated without PEABr decreased by about 32%, while for the inverted device treated with PEABr, there was only a 17% loss of initial PCE. These results indicate that the 2D/3D hybrid structure introduced by PEABr can effectively passivate the defects, prevent water and oxygen intrusion, and improve the stability of the device.
Fig. 7. (a) Stability of perovskite films under ambient conditions with a relative humidity of 60∼80%. (b) Stability evolution of devices without encapsulation in a glove box.
4. Conclusions
In summary, we found that the fill factor of the device improved with the decrease of the defect state density at the interface by simulation, and verified this result experimentally by dynamic spin-coating of PEABr. The dynamically spin-coated PEABr diffuses into the grain boundaries of the perovskite films during thermal annealing, thereby constructing a 2D/3D hybrid structure. Due to the passivation of the 2D/3D hybrid structure formed by PEABr treatment, the quality of the perovskite film is improved, the density of defect states is reduced, and the nonradiative recombination and ion migration are suppressed. Therefore, the PCE of the PEABr-treated device increased from 17.95% to 19.24%. In addition, the PEABr-treated films and devices show better stability. The PEABr-treated perovskite devices stored in N2 atmosphere for 30 days can still maintain the original device PCE of 83%. These results demonstrate that the introduction of 2D/3D hybrid structure into inverted PSCs can effectively improve the device performance.
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China (11874185).
Disclosures
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data underlying the results presented in this paper are not publicly available at this time but may be obtained from the authors upon reasonable request.
References
1. A. Miyata, A. Mitioglu, P. Plochocka, O. Portugall, J. T.-W. Wang, S. D. Stranks, H. J. Snaith, and R. J. Nicholas, “Direct measurement of the exciton binding energy and effective masses for charge carriers in organic-inorganic tri-halide perovskites,” Nat. Phys. 11(7), 582–587 (2015). [CrossRef]
2. D. Shi, V. Adinolfi, R. Comin, M. Yuan, E. Alarousu, A. Buin, Y. Chen, S. Hoogland, A. Rothenberger, K. Katsiev, Y. Losovyj, X. Zhang, P. A. Dowben, O. F. Mohammed, E. H. Sargent, and O. M. Bakr, “Low trap-state density and long carrier diffusion in organolead trihalide perovskite single crystals,” Science 347(6221), 519–522 (2015). [CrossRef]
3. G. Xing, N. Mathews, S. Sun, S. S. Lim, Y. M. Lam, M. Grätzel, S. Mhaisalkar, and T. C. Sum, “Long-range balanced electron-and hole-transport lengths in organic-inorganic CH3NH3PbI3,” Science 342(6156), 344–347 (2013). [CrossRef]
4. L. Song, Y. Liu, R. Guo, and J. Dai, “Excitonic optical properties and lasing mode shifts in square CsPbBr3 nanoplate cavities,” J. Lumin. 251, 119182 (2022). [CrossRef]
5. L. Zhu, C. Wu, S. Riaz, and J. Dai, “Stable silica coated DDAB-CsPbX3 quantum dots and their application for white light-emitting diodes,” J. Lumin. 233, 117884 (2021). [CrossRef]
6. L. Sun, X. Li, L. Song, W. Wang, and J. Dai, “Temperature-dependent surface plasmon enhanced photoluminescence in CsPbBr3 thin film,” Phys. Lett. A 422, 127795 (2022). [CrossRef]
7. M. Kim, J. Jeong, H. Lu, T. K. Lee, F. T. Eickemeyer, Y. Liu, I. W. Choi, S. J. Choi, Y. Jo, H. Kim, S.-I. Mo, Y.-K. Kim, H. Lee, N. G. An, S. Cho, W. R. Tress, S. M. Zakeeruddin, A. Hagfeldt, J. Y. Kim, M. Grätzel, and D. S. Kim, “Conformal quantum dot-SnO2 layers as electron transporters for efficient perovskite solar cells,” Science 375(6578), 302–306 (2022). [CrossRef]
8. N. Li, X. Niu, L. Li, H. Wang, Z. Huang, Y. Zhang, Y. Chen, X. Zhang, C. Zhu, H. Zai, Y. Bai, S. Ma, H. Liu, X. Liu, Z. Guo, G. Liu, R. Fan, H. Chen, J. Wang, Y. Lun, X. Wang, J. Hong, H. Xie, D. S. Jakob, X. G. Xu, Q. Chen, and H. Zhou, “Liquid medium annealing for fabricating durable perovskite solar cells with improved reproducibility,” Science 373(6554), 561–567 (2021). [CrossRef]
9. X. Fu, T. He, S. Zhang, X. Lei, Y. Jiang, D. Wang, P. Sun, D. Zhao, H.-Y. Hsu, X. Li, M. Wang, and M. Yuan, “Halogen-halogen bonds enable improved long-term operational stability of mixed-halide perovskite photovoltaics,” Chem 7(11), 3131–3143 (2021). [CrossRef]
10. M. Kim, I.-w. Choi, S. J. Choi, J. Song, S.-I. Mo, J.-H. An, Y. Jo, S. Ahn, S. K. Ahn, G.-H. Kim, and D. S. Kim, “Enhanced electrical properties of Li-salts doped mesoporous TiO2 in perovskite solar cells,” Joule 5(3), 659–672 (2021). [CrossRef]
11. Y. Feng, J. Zhang, C. Duan, X. Zhang, Y. Zhang, and J. Dai, “Improved inverted MAPbI3 perovskite solar cell with triphenylphosphine oxide passivation layer,” Opt. Mater. 127, 112264 (2022). [CrossRef]
12. B. Chen, H. Chen, Y. Hou, J. Xu, S. Teale, K. Bertens, H. Chen, A. Proppe, Q. Zhou, D. Yu, K. Xu, M. Vafaie, Y. Liu, Y. Dong, E. H. Jung, C. Zheng, T. Zhu, Z. Ning, and E. H. Sargent, “Passivation of the Buried Interface via Preferential Crystallization of 2D Perovskite on Metal Oxide Transport Layers,” Adv. Mater. 33(41), 2103394 (2021). [CrossRef]
13. P. Lin, W. Zhang, L. Tian, F. Zhang, S. Zhou, R. Liu, T. Hu, M. Zhang, L. Du, F. Wen, C. Peng, X. Zhou, and Y. Huang, “Remanent solvent management engineering of perovskite films for PEDOT: PSS-based inverted solar cells,” Sol. Energy 216, 530–536 (2021). [CrossRef]
14. S. Zhang, X. Yan, Z. Liu, H. Zhu, Z. Yang, Y. Huang, S. Liu, D. Wu, M. Pan, and W. Chen, “Evaporated potassium chloride for double-sided interfacial passivation in inverted planar perovskite solar cells,” J. Energy Chem. 54, 493–500 (2021). [CrossRef]
15. S. Yang, J. Dai, Z. Yu, Y. Shao, Y. Zhou, X. Xiao, X. C. Zeng, and J. Huang, “Tailoring passivation molecular structures for extremely small open-circuit voltage loss in perovskite solar cells,” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 141(14), 5781–5787 (2019). [CrossRef]
16. Q. Fu, S. Xiao, X. Tang, Y. Chen, and T. Hu, “Amphiphilic fullerenes employed to improve the quality of perovskite films and the stability of perovskite solar cells,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11(27), 24782–24788 (2019). [CrossRef]
17. Y. Feng, Y. Zhang, C. Duan, M. Zhao, and J. Dai, “Optical properties of CsFAMA-based perovskite film and its application in the inverted solar cells with poly (methyl methacrylate) passivation layer,” Opt. Mater. Express 12(8), 3262–3272 (2022). [CrossRef]
18. Q. Zhang, S. Xiong, J. Ali, K. Qian, Y. Li, W. Feng, H. Hu, J. Song, and F. Liu, “Polymer interface engineering enabling high-performance perovskite solar cells with improved fill factors of over 82%,” J. Mater. Chem. C 8(16), 5467–5475 (2020). [CrossRef]
19. C. Zhang, W. Kong, T. Wu, X. Lin, Y. Wu, J. Nakazaki, H. Segawa, X. Yang, Y. Zhang, Y. Wang, and L. Han, “Reduction of Nonradiative Loss in Inverted Perovskite Solar Cells by Donor-π-Acceptor Dipoles,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13(37), 44321–44328 (2021). [CrossRef]
20. C. Ji, C. Liang, Q. Song, H. Gong, N. Liu, F. You, D. Li, and Z. He, “Interface Engineering of 2D/3D Perovskite Heterojunction Improves Photovoltaic Efficiency and Stability,” Sol. RRL 5(5), 2100072 (2021). [CrossRef]
21. Y. Zhang, S. Jang, I.-W. Hwang, Y. K. Jung, B. R. Lee, J. H. Kim, K. H. Kim, and S. H. Park, “Bilateral interface engineering for efficient and stable perovskite solar cells using phenylethylammonium iodide,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 12(22), 24827–24836 (2020). [CrossRef]
22. M. Wei, K. Xiao, G. Walters, R. Lin, Y. Zhao, M. I. Saidaminov, P. Todorović, A. Johnston, Z. Huang, H. Chen, A. Li, J. Zhu, Z. Yang, Y.-K. Wang, A. H. Proppe, S. O. Kelley, Y. Hou, O. Voznyy, H. Tan, and E. H. Sargent, “Combining efficiency and stability in mixed tin-lead perovskite solar cells by capping grains with an ultrathin 2D layer,” Adv. Mater. 32(12), 1907058 (2020). [CrossRef]
23. C. Zhang, S. Wu, L. Tao, G. M. Arumugam, C. Liu, Z. Wang, S. Zhu, Y. Yang, J. Lin, X. Liu, R. E. I. Schropp, and Y. Mai, “Fabrication strategy for efficient 2D/3D perovskite solar cells enabled by diffusion passivation and strain compensation,” Adv. Energy Mater. 10(43), 2002004 (2020). [CrossRef]
24. F. Zhang, Q. Huang, J. Song, Y. Zhang, C. Ding, F. Liu, D. Liu, X. Li, H. Yasuda, K. Yoshida, J. Qu, S. Hayase, T. Toyoda, T. Minemoto, and Q. Shen, “Growth of Amorphous Passivation Layer Using Phenethylammonium Iodide for High-Performance Inverted Perovskite Solar Cells,” Sol. RRL 4(2), 1900243 (2020). [CrossRef]
25. Y. Liu, B. J. Kim, H. Wu, G. Boschloo, and E. M. J. Johansson, “Efficient and Stable FAPbBr3 Perovskite Solar Cells via Interface Modification by a Low-Dimensional Perovskite Layer,” ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 4(9), 9276–9282 (2021). [CrossRef]
26. J. Li, M. W. G. Yang, D. Zhang, Z. Wang, D. Zheng, and J. Yu, “Bottom-up passivation effects by using 3D/2D mix structure for high performance pin perovskite solar cells,” Sol. Energy 205, 44–50 (2020). [CrossRef]
27. Y. Li, C. Liang, G. Wang, J. Li, 1 S. Chen, S. Yang, G. Xing, and H. Pan, “Two-step solvent post-treatment on PTAA for highly efficient and stable inverted perovskite solar cells,” Photonics Res. 8(10), A39–A49 (2020). [CrossRef]
28. P. Jia, W. Bi, X. Huang, L. Li, W. Gong, Y. Tang, D. Zhao, Y. Hu, Z. Lou, F. Teng, Q. Cui, and Y. Hou, “Discrete SnO2 Nanoparticle-Modified Poly(3, 4-Ethylenedioxythiophene):Poly(Styrenesulfonate) for Efficient Perovskite Solar Cells,” Sol. RRL 3(10), 1900162 (2019). [CrossRef]
29. E. Raza, Z. Ahmad, F. Aziz, M. Asif, A. Ahmed, K. Riaz, J. Bhadra, and N. J. Al-Thani, “Numerical simulation analysis towards the effect of charge transport layers electrical properties on cesium based ternary cation perovskite solar cells performance,” Sol. Energy 225, 842–850 (2021). [CrossRef]
30. J. Haddad, B. Krogmeier, B. Klingebiel, L. Krückemeier, S. Melhem, Z. Liu, J. Hüpkes, S. Mathur, and T. Kirchartz, “Analyzing Interface Recombination in Lead-Halide Perovskite Solar Cells with Organic and Inorganic Hole-Transport Layers,” Adv. Mater. Interfaces 7(16), 2000366 (2020). [CrossRef]
31. M. B. Kanoun, A.-A. Kanoun, A. E. Merad, and S. Goumri-Saidc, “Device design optimization with interface engineering for highly efficient mixed cations and halides perovskite solar cells,” Results Phys. 20, 103707 (2021). [CrossRef]
32. F. Azri, A. Meftah, N. Sengouga, and A. Meftah, “Electron and hole transport layers optimization by numerical simulation of a perovskite solar cell,” Sol. Energy 181, 372–378 (2019). [CrossRef]
33. K. Sobayel, M. Akhtaruzzaman, K. S. Rahman, M. T. Ferdaous, Z. A. Al-Mutairi, H. F. Alharbi, N. H. Alharthi, M. R. Karim, S. Hasmadyc, and N. Amina, “A comprehensive defect study of tungsten disulfide (WS2) as electron transport layer in perovskite solar cells by numerical simulation,” Results Phys. 12, 1097–1103 (2019). [CrossRef]
34. L. Lin, L. Jiang, P. Li, H. Xiong, Z. Kang, B. Fan, and Y. Qiu, “Simulated development and optimized performance of CsPbI3 based all-inorganic perovskite solar cells,” Sol. Energy 198, 454–460 (2020). [CrossRef]
35. J. S. J. Hargreaves, “Some considerations related to the use of the Scherrer equation in powder X-ray diffraction as applied to heterogeneous catalysts,” Catal. Struct. React. 2(1-4), 33–37 (2016). [CrossRef]
36. F. T. L. Muniz, M. A. R. Miranda, C. M. dos Santos, and J. M. Sasaki, “The Scherrer equation and the dynamical theory of X-ray diffraction,” Acta Crystallogr., Sect. A: Found. Adv. 72(3), 385–390 (2016). [CrossRef]
37. Y. Lin, Y. Bai, Y. Fang, Z. Chen, S. Yang, X. Zheng, S. Tang, Y. Liu, J. Zhao, and J. Huang, “Enhanced thermal stability in perovskite solar cells by assembling 2D/3D stacking structures,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 9(3), 654–658 (2018). [CrossRef]
38. Y. Lv, Y. Shi, X. Song, J. Liu, M. Wang, S. Wang, Y. Feng, S. Jin, and C. Hao, “Bromine doping as an efficient strategy to reduce the interfacial defects in hybrid two-dimensional/three-dimensional stacking perovskite solar cells,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 10(37), 31755–31764 (2018). [CrossRef]
39. S. Gharibzadeh, B. A. Nejand, M. Jakoby, T. Abzieher, D. Hauschild, S. Moghadamzadeh, J. A. Schwenzer, P. Brenner, R. Schmager, A. A. Haghighirad, L. Weinhardt, U. Lemmer, B. S. Richards, I. A. Howard, and U. W. Paetzold, “Record open-circuit voltage wide-bandgap perovskite solar cells utilizing 2D/3D perovskite heterostructure,” Adv. Energy Mater. 9(21), 1803699 (2019). [CrossRef]
40. K. Chen, P. Wu, W. Yang, R. Su, D. Luo, X. Yang, Y. Tu, R. Zhu, and Q. Gong, “Low-dimensional perovskite interlayer for highly efficient lead-free formamidinium tin iodide perovskite solar cells,” Nano Energy 49, 411–418 (2018). [CrossRef]
41. H. Wang, Y. Ouyang, W. Zou, X. Liu, H. Li, R. Zhou, X. Peng, and X. Gong, “Enhanced Activation Energy Released by Coordination of Bifunctional Lewis Based-Tryptophan for Highly Efficient and Stable Perovskite Solar Cells,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13(49), 58458–58466 (2021). [CrossRef]
42. J. Shin, M. Kim, S. Jung, C. S. Kim, J. Park, A. Song, K.-B. Chung, S.-H. Jin, J. H. Lee, and M. Song, “Enhanced efficiency in lead-free bismuth iodide with post-treatment based on a hole-conductor-free perovskite solar cell,” Nano Res. 11(12), 6283–6293 (2018). [CrossRef]
43. Y. Shao, Z. Xiao, C. Bi, Y. Yuan, and J. Huang, “Origin and elimination of photocurrent hysteresis by fullerene passivation in CH3NH3PbI3 planar heterojunction solar cells,” Nat. Commun. 5(1), 1–7 (2014). [CrossRef]
44. Y. Li, B. Wang, T. Liu, Q. Zeng, D. Cao, H. Pan, and G. Xing, “Interfacial Engineering of PTAA/Perovskites for Improved Crystallinity and Hole Extraction in Inverted Perovskite Solar Cells,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 14(2), 3284–3292 (2022). [CrossRef]
45. H. Zai, Y. Ma, Q. Chen, and H. Zhou, “Ion migration in halide perovskite solar cells: Mechanism, characterization, impact and suppression,” J. Energy Chem. 63, 528–549 (2021). [CrossRef]
