Search

Over the past decades, the field of organic solar cells (OSCs) has witnessed a significant evolution in materials chemistry, which has resulted in a remarkable enhancement of device performance, achieving efficiencies of over 19%. The photoactive layer materials in OSCs play a crucial role in light absorption, charge generation, transport and stability. To facilitate the scale-up of OSCs, it is imperative to address the photostability of these electron acceptor and donor materials, as their photochemical degradation process remains a challenge during the photo-to-electric conversion. In this review, we present an overview of the development of electron acceptor and donor materials, emphasizing the crucial aspects of their chemical stability behavior that are linked to the photostability of OSCs. Throughout each section, we highlight the photochemical degradation pathways for electron acceptor and donor materials, and their link to device degradation. We also discuss the existing interdisciplinary challenges and obstacles that impede the development of photostable materials. Finally, we offer insights into strategies aimed at enhancing photochemical stability and discuss future directions for developing photostable photo-active layers, facilitating the commercialization of OSCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Poly(nickel-benzene-1,2,4,5-tetrakis(thiolate)) (Ni-btt), an organometallic coordination polymer (OMCP) characterized by the coordination between benzene-1,2,4,5-tetrakis(thiolate) (btt) and Ni2+ ions, has been recognized as a promising p-type thermoelectric material. In this study, we employed a constitutional isomer based on benzene-1,2,3,4-tetrakis(thiolate) (ibtt) to generate the corresponding isomeric polymer, poly(nickel-benzene-1,2,3,4-tetrakis(thiolate)) (Ni-ibtt). Comparative analysis of Ni-ibtt and Ni-btt reveals several common infrared (IR) and Raman features attributed to their similar square-planar nickel–sulfur (Ni–S) coordination. Nevertheless, these two polymer isomers exhibit substantially different backbone geometries. Ni-btt possesses a linear backbone, whereas Ni-ibtt exhibits a more undulating, zig-zag-like structure. Consequently, Ni-ibtt demonstrates slightly higher solubility and an increased bandgap in comparison to Ni-btt. The most noteworthy dissimilarity, however, manifests in their thermoelectric properties. While Ni-btt exhibits p-type behavior, Ni-ibtt demonstrates n-type carrier characteristics. This intriguing divergence prompted further investigation into the influence of OMCP backbone geometry on the electronic structure and, particularly, the thermoelectric properties of these materials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]