Optoelectronics

Explore a design question

Use published measurements to test a requirement, distinguish molecular and device changes, or assess an explanation for a surface treatment. Change the controls, inspect the observed result, then save the evidence with your own interpretation and proposed next measurement.

The Explore workspace opens at the Optoelectronics collection. Materials and Applications remain available in the same collection; selected material links retain the directory view.

Efficiency and lifetime: which reported devices meet both requirements?

Choose an EQE checkpoint of 1,000 or 10,000 cd m⁻², set a minimum EQE from 0 to 40% and a minimum measured LT50 from 0 to 200 h. The plot and table show which of the four Hu devices meet both inclusive thresholds, and which requirement excludes each remaining device.

The A–D devices share a reported stack with 1 wt% emitter in a 50 nm DMIC-TRZ emitting layer. Every LT50 value comes from a separate ageing test starting at 1,000 cd m⁻². Changing the EQE checkpoint does not change that lifetime condition or predict lifetime at 10,000 cd m⁻².

This is descriptive screening of representative reported values, not a validated product specification or a statistical qualification. The comparison does not isolate one molecular rate as the cause of efficiency or degradation.

Primary evidence: Hu et al. (2022), Supporting Table 8 for LT50 and Table 10 for EQE.

Molecule and device: does the preferred device change with brightness?

Compare D1 with D2 to change the emitter within the reported common TADF architecture, or D2 with D3 to keep the terminal emitter while changing the architecture. Select the shared reported brightness of 10, 100 or 1,000 cd m⁻². The workspace shows each EQE and the selected-minus-baseline difference in percentage points, using discrete published checkpoints without an interpolated crossover.

D1→D2 changes emitter identity and emission colour. D2→D3 changes the host, sensitiser, transport layers and emitting-layer thickness together; its contrast cannot isolate a sensitiser effect. Equal luminance does not mean equal photon flux, current density or excitation density.

Lifetime conditions remain separate: D1 and D2 measured LT80 from 100 cd m⁻², while D3 was measured from 1,000 cd m⁻². D3’s quoted 1,010 h at 100 cd m⁻² is extrapolated, not directly measured; no measured D2/D3 lifetime ratio is inferred.

Primary evidence: Hao et al. (2025), published checkpoints in Figures 5–6; Device Table 2.

Surface and current: does higher current mean a better transistor?

Select a measured gate voltage from −40 to 60 V in 2 V steps and keep the forward and reverse sweeps separate. Compare the same representative Cl₂-NDI transistor before and after N-silane vapour treatment: a 47 µm crystal at VD = 10 V and 300 K, exposed to vapour from a 100 µL liquid dose for 1 h. The source supplies 204 current observations across the two treatments and two sweeps; the display does not interpolate or fit them.

The after/before value is a drain-current ratio, not a mobility gain. It is withheld when either drain current is at most ten times the magnitude of its gate current. This display heuristic is not an instrument noise floor or a significance test; passing it does not establish measurement robustness.

Inspect AFM, XPS with diffraction, Kelvin-probe or optical evidence to separate observation, inference and limitation. These are supporting controls from the same study, not all measurements on the selected transistor. A current increase alone does not establish improved switching or uniquely identify the microscopic mechanism.

Primary evidence: He et al. (2021), Figure 2a; Author current dataset, version 3 (CC BY 4.0); Supporting characterisation and controls.

Keep an evidence notebook

Write an interpretation and a next measurement, then save the current settings and evidence. A saved entry retains the observed values, conditions, limitations, source locators and numerical-data SHA256 alongside the two user-authored fields. Later control changes do not rewrite saved observations.

Save up to 20 entries in this browser, restore an entry’s settings, or export one entry or the complete notebook as Markdown with the exact machine-readable evidence snapshot. Restoring settings opens the current dataset; the saved snapshot remains the historical record. Browser-storage failures switch to a temporary in-memory notebook, which must be exported before leaving.

Copy investigation link shares the controls, not private notes. Draft text stays in this tab through material visits and reloads when session storage is available; a visible fallback explains when it lasts only until reload. The notebook distinguishes published evidence and calculated observations from the user’s interpretation; an export is neither a new experiment nor a validation of that interpretation.

Materials

Research OLED applications

These are published laboratory OLED devices, not retail products or claims of commercial lifetime. Film measurements, device measurements and calculations retain their own conditions.

• 2PXZBN: green OLED device A
• 2PTZBN: green OLED device B
• BNSSe: green OLED device C
• BNSeSe: green OLED device D
• ν-DABNA-M: blue OLED emitter
• ν-DABNA-M-B-Mes: blue OLED emitter

Device-ensemble evidence

Published device-ensemble summary, distinct from representative-device values and the single source curve

Averages are reported as based on over fifteen independent devices. Exact n per condition is not supplied.

The retrieved SI table and adjoining text do not define the ± statistic; do not relabel it as SD, SEM or a confidence interval.

Percentage points of EQE; not a relative percentage of the mean

These ensemble means must not silently replace the paper’s representative-device maxima or be used as pointwise error bars on the downloaded Figure 3e curves.

• Supplementary Table 10, printed page 32 (PDF page 33)
• Supplementary Table 8 footnote, printed pages 29–30 (PDF pages 30–31)

Device conditions and limits

Hu et al. (2022): A–D use 1 wt% emitter in DMIC-TRZ, a 50 nm emitting layer. All listed LT50 measurements start at 1000 cd m−2.

This series is not an isolated causal test of RISC versus lifetime. Heteroatom substitution changes other molecular and device properties.

TADF-D1: LT80 = 67 h measured at initial luminance 100 cd m−2.

TADF-D2: LT80 = 15 h measured at initial luminance 100 cd m−2.

PSF-D3: LT80 = 16 h measured at initial luminance 1000 cd m−2. The 1010 h value at 100 cd m−2 is estimated using the assumed exponent n = 1.8; it is not a 1010-hour measurement.

Host, transport layers, sensitizer and emissive-layer thickness all change; differences are architecture-level associations, not an isolated sensitizer effect.

Compare efficiency at the operating brightness

All four Hu devices report EQE at 1000 and 10000 cd m−2. These tabulated checkpoints support a common-luminance comparison; each device’s peak EQE is its own reference, not a shared brightness.

Absolute loss = peak EQE − checkpoint EQE, in percentage points (pp). Relative roll-off = 100 × (peak EQE − checkpoint EQE) / peak EQE, in percent. Retained peak efficiency = 100 × checkpoint EQE / peak EQE.

BNSeSe at 1000 cd m−2: EQE 34% versus peak 36.8%; the loss is 2.8 pp, relative roll-off 7.61%, and retained peak efficiency 92.39%. These calculations use representative-device values, not ensemble means.

• Hu et al. (2022), SI Table 10: representative-device checkpoints

Measured electrical operating points

Hu et al. 2022 devices A–D; vacuum-deposited common stack; 1 wt% emitter in DMIC-TRZ, 50 nm emitting layer. The dataset contains 83 observed operating points joined by exact luminance across the Figure 3d–f source sheets; no voltage or current is interpolated.

With J in mA cm−2 and V in volts, electrical input per area is J × V in mW cm−2; multiply by 10 for W m−2. Equal voltage is not equal brightness. Switching emitters in the interactive view selects the nearest observed brightness and displays its actual value.

Source lm W−1 values are photometric luminous efficacy, not dimensionless optical power efficiency. The separate πL/(10JV) check assumes Lambertian angular emission; agreement checks arithmetic without establishing the angular pattern. The selected display domain requires L ≥ 1 cd m−2, positive V/J and EQE within 0–100%; all raw rows remain downloadable.

Device C retains two flagged source current-efficiency values: 18.98234 cd A−1 at 10 V and 10.58127 cd A−1 at 10.4 V. The J–V–L recomputations are 20.01622 and 10.24933 cd A−1. The original entries are preserved, and the source luminous-efficacy values remain consistent with J–V–L arithmetic.

No pointwise experimental error bars are supplied. These bipolar-device observations do not identify mobility, injection barriers or the cause of efficiency loss.

• Hu Figure 3 source workbook
• Electrical operating-point data
• Electrical analysis and source discrepancies
• Electrical-analysis reproducibility bundle
• Electrical-analysis source manifest

Choose the brightness before ranking the blue OLEDs

All three devices have published numerical EQE labels at 10, 100 and 1000 cd m−2. Values below are discrete reported checkpoints; no missing point is interpolated and no full curve is reconstructed.

PSF-D3 minus TADF-D2: −5.5 pp at 10 cd m−2; −0.4 pp at 100 cd m−2; +5.5 pp at 1000 cd m−2. The sensitised device ranks below the standard TADF device at the first two checkpoints and above it at 1000 cd m−2. This does not establish an exact crossover luminance or statistical significance.

These are device-to-device EQE differences in percentage points, distinct from each device’s loss relative to its own peak. Matching luminance does not match current or excitation density, particularly when emission spectra differ. D2 versus D3 also changes host, sensitiser, transport layers and emitting-layer thickness.

Measured ageing conditions: TADF-D1, LT80 67 h from 100 cd m−2; TADF-D2, LT80 15 h from 100 cd m−2; PSF-D3, LT80 16 h from 1000 cd m−2. The different starting luminances prevent a direct D3/D2 lifetime ratio; the quoted 1010 h at 100 cd m−2 for D3 is an extrapolation.

• Hao et al. (2025), Figure 5: standard TADF devices
• Hao et al. (2025), Figure 6: sensitised device
• Hao et al. (2025), Table 2: measured lifetimes and device summaries

Sources and reproducible analysis

Published measurements, source-derived rates and Mol2Mat calculations are identified separately. The downloads reproduce the analysis without claiming new synthesis, device fabrication or electronic-structure calculations.

• Reproducibility bundle
• Analysis JSON
• Source manifest
• Python calculation
• Measured device observations CSV
• Condition-annotated records
• Published computed elementary rates
• Efficient selenium-integrated TADF OLEDs with reduced roll-off
• Supporting information, Tables 8–10
• Figure 3 numerical source workbook
• Quantitative prediction of rate constants and its application to organic emitters
• Physical data and inferred kinetic parameters in 1 wt% DMIC-TRZ films
• Final published Figure 3: A–D device architecture and performance
• Author-shared final article, device architecture text

Sources and reproducible analysis

Published measurements, source-derived rates and Mol2Mat calculations are identified separately. The downloads reproduce the analysis without claiming new synthesis, device fabrication or electronic-structure calculations.

• Reproducibility bundle
• Analysis JSON
• Source manifest
• Python calculation
• Condition-annotated data
• Film measurements CSV
• Device measurements CSV
• Measured and estimated lifetimes CSV
• article
• photophysics-table
• devices-table
• supplement