4.2 Article

Stability of 2D and quasi-2D perovskite materials and devices

期刊

COMMUNICATIONS MATERIALS
卷 3, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s43246-022-00285-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. Seed Funding for Basic Research and Seed Funding for Strategic Interdisciplinary Research Scheme of the University of Hong Kong
  2. RGC GRF project [17301520]
  3. RGC CRF project [7018-20G, 7035-20G]
  4. NSFC [6207032617]
  5. Research Cooperability Program of the Croatian Science Foundation - European Union from the European Social Fund under the Operational Program Efficient Human Resources 2014-2020 [PZS-2019-02-2068]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

2D and quasi-2D perovskite materials have shown improved stability compared to their 3D counterparts. However, there is a lack of fundamental research and understanding of these materials, as well as limited structure-property studies. Research is often done through trial and error rather than design.
3D perovskites are widely researched for their use in optoelectronic devices, yet suffer from issues with environmental stability. Here, the improved stability of 2D and quasi-2D perovskites under a range of environmental factors, as compared to their 3D counterparts, is discussed. Different 2D and quasi-2D perovskite materials have demonstrated significant improvements in the device stability compared to 3D perovskites due to their increased hydrophobicity and suppressed ion migration. However, fundamental investigations of these materials have been scarce and consequently detailed understanding of the processes responsible for experimental phenomena are often lacking despite huge interest in these materials. Even more importantly, there have been a limited number of structure-property studies for different material compositions, and research is generally by trial and error rather than by design. Here we discuss different stability issues in these materials and identify questions which need to be answered to design materials with further stability improvements.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据