Ask any question about EPFL courses, lectures, exercises, research, news, etc. or try the example questions below.
DISCLAIMER: The Graph Chatbot is not programmed to provide explicit or categorical answers to your questions. Rather, it transforms your questions into API requests that are distributed across the various IT services officially administered by EPFL. Its purpose is solely to collect and recommend relevant references to content that you can explore to help you answer your questions.
The influence of interface modification of sensitized TiO2 surfaces by co-adsorbents on photovoltaic performance is detailed. We investigated different functional groups of co-adsorbents, such as carboxylic (4-guanidino butyric acid, chenodeoxycholic acid), phosphinic (dineohexyl phosphinic acid), and phosphonic (dodecyl phosphonic acid), to better highlight their influence on the device performance and accurately classify them into de-aggregating agents or agents with both de-aggregating and co-adsorbing properties. By optimizing the type of co-adsorbent and its concentration in the dye solution, we reached an efficiency of 11.0% using 4-guanidino butyric acid or dineohexyl phosphinic acid, compared to 10.6% when the benchmark chenodeoxycholic acid was used. The presence of co-adsorbents on the TiO2 surface was studied using ATR-FTIR spectroscopy. The role of these co-adsorbents on the band edge shift versus the recombination resistance is discussed.