Solar Energy 209 (2020) 21–29

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Solar Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/solener

A data review on certified perovskite solar cells efficiency and I-V metrics:
Insights into materials selection and process scaling up
Jialiu Ma *, Da Guo
First Solar, Inc. Perrysburg, OH 43551, USA

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Perovskite solar cells have achieved tremendous progress reaching record efficiency in the past 5 years.
Perovskite Numerous new processes and chemistry have been reported and contribute to the rapid progress. Continuous
Solar cell efficiency improvements are still necessary for perovskite solar cells, and a data review on devices performance
Scale up
over multiple studies could boost the technology development. Such review could identify patterns or provide
Efficiency
Certification
insights that are not obvious in a single study. Here we present a high quality dataset containing only inde­
pendently certified Pb-based perovskite solar cells summarizing their efficiency, relevant I-V metrics,
manufacturing processes and materials used. Analysis over the dataset provides insights on how aperture size,
device architecture, perovskite deposition methods and materials used in each functional layer affect the final
solar cell efficiency and I-V metrics. Future directions are also suggested for efficiency improvements.

Perovskite solar cells have seen tremendous improvements in the
past several years (Jena et al., 2019). Their efficiency have matched or
even exceeded the state of art inorganic photovoltaic devices that have
gone through decades of research and development (Green et al., 2020).
Continuous efficiency improvements are crucial for perovskite solar
cells. Higher efficiency will enhance the cost advantage towards
commercialization (Rong et al., 2018). Thus the quest for new record of
device efficiency and relevant I-V metrics (open-circuit voltage (Voc),
short-circuit current density (Jsc) and fill factor (FF), etc.) continues in
the perovskite community. Despite the large number of perovskite solar
cell papers published since 2013, advancing towards a higher efficiency
perovskite device could be a daunting task for the following reasons.
• Process development sometimes relies solely on empirical knowl­
edge from a small number of studies with limited processes/mate­
rials tested (Kim et al., 2018). Such empirical knowledge can be
misleading regarding what process/materials should be focused on
for further optimization.
• Device data quality in the literature differs from lab to lab. Lateral
comparison across different studies are challenging due to lacking
widely accepted standards for measuring and reporting device per­
formances (Dunbar et al., 2017; Khenkin et al., 2020; Yanbo Wang
et al., 2019). While important lessons can and are learned within the
perovskite community, finding common themes across studies is
critical to determining if observations are general and cross cutting
or narrow and specific.
• The majority of research lab level efforts are still focused on cell level
that lacks a connection to process scaling up (Khenkin et al., 2020).
This poses obstacles for the commercialization of perovskite solar
cell technology.
Data review is an approach that combines the results of multiple
scientific studies. This tool could identity patterns or provides insights
that are not obvious in a single study. Furthermore, the collection of data
across multiples studies on the same process/material could lead to a
more statistically solid conclusion. Hereby, we present a data review on
a high-quality perovskite efficiency dataset containing only indepen­
dently certified Pb-based perovskite solar cell devices. The analysis does
not intend to provide a comprehensive review over efforts on improving
perovskite solar cell efficiency which can be found in other excellent
reviews (Boyd et al., 2019; Dai et al., 2020; Jena et al., 2019; Schulz
et al., 2019; Urbina, 2020; R. Wang et al., 2019). Instead, this analysis
focuses on revealing trends and insights that is obscured in single study
regarding process scaling up, device fabrication methods, device archi­
tecture, components engineering and their impact to efficiency and I-V
metrics. The analysis would provide the following to address challenges
towards new record perovskite devices:

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jialiu.ma@firstsolar.com (J. Ma).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.08.090
Received 14 July 2020; Received in revised form 25 August 2020; Accepted 28 August 2020
Available online 7 September 2020
0038-092X/© 2020 International Solar Energy Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Ma and D. Guo
• A high-quality perovskite solar cell data set that only contains
independently certified devices. Information on efficiency, I-V met­
rics, materials and processes used for fabricating the devices are
summarized for each individual study.
• A data review focusing on the following aspect:
1. Temporal evolution of perovskite solar cells device efficiency and
I-V metrics
2. Effects of scaling up device aperture size on efficiency and I-V
metrics
3. Effects of device architecture on efficiency and I-V metrics
4. Effects of perovskite deposition method on efficiency and I-V
metrics
5. Effects of types of transparent conductive oxide (TCO) substrates
used (fluorine doped tin oxide (FTO) vs indium doped tin oxide
(ITO)) on efficiency and I-V metrics
6. Effects of perovskite absorber chemistry on device efficiency and
I-V metrics
7. Effects of types of electron transport layer (ETL)/hole transport
layer (HTL) used on efficiency and I-V metrics
• Suggestions based on the data review for future development di­
rections on materials selection, device processing, scaling up and
fundamental understanding.
It is a known challenge to measure perovskite device performances
consistently, accurately and precisely due to issues such as device hys­
teresis and environmental instability (Zimmermann et al., 2016).
Analysis on poor measurements data lacking environmental control
(temperature and humidity), well-maintained electrical setup and well-
calibrated light source can lead to biased conclusions. In this paper, only
device data independently verified by certification agencies are included
for analysis. The certification agencies are meticulous about all aspects
of measurement (setup, tools, light source, electronics, environmental
control, etc.) and comply with international standardization re­
quirements. Furthermore, certification reports containing original data
are available in the publications making data management feasible.
To the best of our ability, we collected 69 certified devices in a total
of 63 publications in the public domain from 2013 to 2020 (Abuhelaiqa
et al., 2019; D. Bi et al., 2017; Bi et al., 2016; E. Bi et al., 2017; Bishop
et al., 2017; Bu et al., 2020, 2019; Burschka et al., 2013; Chen et al.,
2017, 2015, 2019; Chu et al., 2019; Chung et al., 2019; Cui et al., 2019;
Deng et al., 2019; Ding et al., 2018; Hang et al., 2019; Jeon et al., 2018,
2014; Jiang et al., 2017, 2016, 2019; Jung et al., 2019; H. Kim et al.,
2019; Kim et al., 2017; M. Kim et al., 2019; Lee et al., 2018; Li et al.,
2018, 2019, 2016; Liu et al., 2019; Lu et al., 2017; Matsui et al., 2019;
Mei et al., 2014; Niu et al., 2019; Priyadarshi et al., 2016; Quan et al.,
2016; Shen et al., 2020; Stolterfoht et al., 2018; Tan et al., 2017; Wagner
et al., 2018; J. Wang et al., 2020; L. Wang et al., 2019a; P. Wang et al.,
2020; Yong Wang et al., 2019; Wei et al., 2018; Wu et al., 2017, 2016;
Xie et al., 2019; Xu et al., 2019; Yang et al., 2018, 2016, 2015, 2017; Yoo
et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2019, 2018, 2020; Zheng et al., 2017, 2020;
Zhu et al., 2019, 2018; Zuo et al., 2019). Certification report in each
publication is digitized and efficiency, I-V metrics (Voc, Jsc and FF) and
measurements settings are summarized into a single table. We also
extract device architecture, fabrication and materials information from
those publications and add in the table. The table will be available (see
supporting information section) for the perovskite community to use
and analyze. The number of publications reporting certified devices
each year has increased from 1 publication in 2013 to 18 in 2019. These
devices are manufactured from wide geographic origins of 12 different
countries and 38 institutions. Among the certification agencies, Newport
PV lab has certified most number of devices (34 out of 69 devices).
Scaling up the size of the perovskite solar cell is a necessary step
towards future commercialization. Larger solar cells or modules usually
demonstrate lower efficiency due to scaling up issues (Rong et al., 2018).
Thus it is crucial to look at the device size when comparing devices
manufactured using different chemistry and processes. Large device size
22
Solar Energy 209 (2020) 21–29
Fig. 1. Certified perovskite’s solar cell I-V metrics plotted by publication sub­
mission date and colored by device size based on their aperture areas (Red:
~0.1 cm2; Green: ~1 cm2; Blue: >10 cm2). Red dotted lines marks a hypo­
thetical 20% efficiency device with Voc at 1.10 V, Jsc at 24 mA/cm2 and FF at
75% for reference purpose. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
also poses greater challenges in performance measurements. If not
properly addressed (light source, environment control, electrical set up,
etc), measurements on larger device size would lead to lower precision
and higher uncertainty. These challenges again emphasize the necessity
of certifying devices especially those with larger sizes. Furthermore, the
defined area of a solar cell during measurements has a large effect on the
efficiency. Processes such as laser scribing and bussing will add in non-
functional dead areas for solar modules. The certified devices typically
report the defined area in the format of aperture area which is defined by
masking and include all components such as active material, busbars,
fingers and interconnects. In this paper we will use aperture area to
represent the total cell or module size. All certified devices are divided
into three groups based on aperture area. Among the 69 certified de­
vices, 47 devices’ aperture areas are close to 0.1 cm2 (termed sub-cell
device in this paper) and 14 other devices close to 1 cm2 (termed cell
device in this paper). Devices with aperture area ~0.1 cm2 are still the
most used to demonstrate new perovskite technology. Only 8 certified
devices were reported with an aperture area over 10 cm2 (termed sub­
module device in this paper). Included in our dataset, the largest certi­
fied device was reported with an aperture area of 63.7 cm2, close to an 8
cm × 8 cm dimension. New perovskite technology breakthrough
demonstrated and certified at a submodule level are still relatively rare.
Perovskite solar cell efficiency improved rapidly in the past 5 years
(Jena et al., 2019). A temporal analysis of the efficiency data can provide
the improvements trend. Certified perovskite solar cells reported before
2016 mostly show efficiency below 20%. Only after 2016, sub-cell de­
vices consistently exceed 20% efficiency (Fig. 1). The 47 sub-cell devices
are certified with efficiency ranging from 11.01% to 23.48% with a
median efficiency of 20.50% (Fig. 2a). Scaling up device size does
decrease their efficiency. It took another 2 years until 2018 before the
first certified cell device to reach 20% efficiency mark. Among the 14
certified cell devices, the lowest efficiency is 6.59% and highest being
20.87% with a median of 19.30% (Fig. 2a). Scaling up from 0.1 cm2
aperture area to 1 cm2 lead to an absolute 1.18% median efficiency drop.
Attempts to further scale up the solar cell size show greater efficiency
drop. The first certified submodule size device was reported in late 2016
J. Ma and D. Guo
with an efficiency of only 9.11%. The efficiency improved substantially
in the past 3 years with the newest submodule device certified with an
impressive 16.50% efficiency (Note: NREL efficiency chart has recently
revealed a submodule device certified with 17.25% efficiency from
Microquanta, Inc (Green et al., 2020). However, the details of the device
fabrication and processing are not available in the public domain, so it is
not included in our analysis). The median efficiency of the 8 submodule
devices is 14.69%, an absolute 5.81% lower than the sub-cell size de­
vices median efficiency.
Basic parameters determined from I-V curves under standard test
conditions such as Voc, Jsc and FF provide more details on the device
improvement. An analysis of these parameters could help understand
Fig. 3. (a) Certified perovskite’s solar cell I-V metrics plotted by publication submission date and colored by perovskite absorber deposition method (red: spin
coating; blue: solution-based coating; green: vapor-based deposition). The grouped (b) efficiency, (c) Voc, (d) Jsc and (e) FF data based on spin-coating vs non spin-
coating deposition methods are also shown and colored by device size type. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred
to the web version of this article.)
23
Solar Energy 209 (2020) 21–29
Fig. 2. Grouped (a) Efficiency, (b) Voc, (C) Jsc and
(d) FF from all certified perovskite solar cells based
on different aperture areas (sub cell: ~0.1 cm2; cell:
~1 cm2; submodule: >10 cm2). All descriptive
boxplots in this review are defined as following to
provide statistics summary. Upper and lower
boundaries of the boxes represent the third quartile
and first quartile, respectively. Red error bars indi­
cate 1.5 times interquartile range out from third
quartile and first quartile, respectively. The red
middle line in each box indicates the median value.
(For interpretation of the references to colour in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the web
version of this article.)
the efficiency gap for process scaling up (Zimmermann et al., 2016).
Both sub cell and cell size solar cells show a median Voc over 1.1 V with
a narrow distribution (median Voc: sub-cell devices: 1.12 V; cell devices:
1.11 V). Submodule solar cells have a much wider distribution of Voc
with only 3 out of the 8 devices’ Voc exceeding 1.1 V (Fig. 2c). On the
other hand, Jsc for scaled up devices are substantially lower (median
Jsc: sub-cell device: 23.77 mA/cm2; cell devices: 21.77 mA/cm2; sub­
module devices: 20.34 mA/cm2) (Fig. 2d). In addition to Jsc differences,
a small fill factor gap is found even for most recent devices (median fill
factor: 77.0% for sub-cell device vs 75.4% for cell device vs 68.8% for
submodule devices) (Fig. 2e). Efforts developing scaling up process for
perovskite solar cells should focus on root cause investigations and
J. Ma and D. Guo Solar Energy 209 (2020) 21–29

Scheme 1. Three types of perovskite device architectures used in certified perovskite solar cells.

Fig. 4. (a) Certified perovskite’s solar cell efficiency, Voc, Jsc and FF plotted by publication submission date and colored by device structure (red: planar; blue:
mesoscopic; green: inverted planar). The grouped (b) efficiency, (c) Voc, (d) Jsc and (e) FF data based on these device structures are also shown and colored by device
size type. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

process/materials engineering to minimize the gap for Jsc and FF.
One critical process to scale up for perovskite solar cell is deposition
for perovskite as the absorber layer (Huang et al., 2019). Currently spin
coating is the most adopted method to deposit perovskite layer in a
research lab setting. 60 out of 69 certified solar cells used the spin
coating method for perovskite deposition. However, applying spin
coating method for high volume manufacturing will be a great chal­
lenge. It is thus needed to experiment with alternative high volume
manufacturing friendly methods. 10 certified solar cells attempted al­
ternatives methods that have been previously demonstrated in thin film
solar technology (CdTe, CIGS and a-Si) at commercial scale. The
methods used can be classified into solution-based coating (screen
printing, pressure processing, blade coating and infiltration) and vapor-
based depositions (spray coating, vacuum assisted deposition and ther­
mal evaporation). It is found that non-spin coating methods produce
overall lower efficiency solar cells (Fig. 3a, b) (median efficiency: spin-
coating 20.17% vs non spin-coating 13.33%) with lower Voc (Fig. 3c),
Jsc (Fig. 3d) and FF (Fig. 3e). However, it is unfair to conclude these
alternative methods are inferior to spin coating method. Spin-coating
method has been intensively developed and optimized for the state-of-
art perovskite device. These alternative methods simply need more
development and process optimization. It is also noticed that hole
transport layer and electron transport layer also heavily rely on spin
coating method for deposition in almost all certified solar cells. More
efforts in searching, screening and optimizing alternative high volume
manufacturing friendly methods are needed for both absorber and
transport layer depositions processes.
A high efficiency perovskite solar cell typically consists of multiple
functional layers including transparent conductive oxide (TCO) layer,
electron transport layer (ETL) – an n-type semiconductor, perovskite
absorber layer, hole transport layer (HTL) – a p-type semiconductor and
conductive electrode layer (Scheme 1). Depending on the sequence of
depositing ETL, perovskite absorber and HTL, three types of device ar­
chitectures are used among the certified devices. Early perovskite de­
vices mostly adopt a mesoscopic architecture (26 devices) where
mesoporous metal oxide scaffold for absorber was used in a conven­
tional n-i-p type architecture. After 2016, conventional n-i-p type planar
structure without the mesoporous scaffold gained popularity (35 de­
vices) and demonstrate comparable efficiency to mesoscopic structure
(Fig. 4a). Inverted p-i-n structure (8 devices) is also investigated by a few
labs. It should be noted that inverted architecture requires the devel­
opment of suitable ETLs and HTLs different from the conventional n-i-p
structure. Despite less development on inverted structure, similar record
efficiency (22.34% Eff) has been shown (Zheng et al., 2020). Analysis on
the certified devices shows that mesoscopic and planar structure show
almost matched median efficiency, Voc, Jsc and FF (Fig. 4b-e). The
finding aligns with the previous literature reports that mesoscopic
structure is not a must to achieve high performance (Liu et al., 2013).
With less reported cases, inverted structure devices match with the other
two structures on Voc and FF, while Jsc seem to be slightly lower with

24
J. Ma and D. Guo Solar Energy 209 (2020) 21–29

Fig. 5. . (a) I-V metrics data of devices (spin coating deposited sub cell devices only) using different types of TCOs are plotted by publication submission date. The
time series I-V metrics data are grouped and shown in (b) for comparison.

high variance (Fig. 4b-e). No clear-cut conclusion could be made on
which structure will produce the best performing device based on the
current data. Thus systematic developments on all structures and re-
evaluations are needed when more data are available.
Besides device architecture, materials used in each layer are critical
to the overall device efficiency. It is not our intent here to review all
improvements made on each layer and analyze how they impact on
device efficiency. These have been reviewed comprehensively elsewhere
(Boyd et al., 2019; Dai et al., 2020; Jena et al., 2019; Schulz et al., 2019;
Urbina, 2020; R. Wang et al., 2019). In this paper, we focus only on
understanding how choice of materials for each layer could impact the
efficiency and I-V metrics using a data driven approach. As noted before,
devices with larger device size (cell and submodule size) or those using
non spin-coating method for perovskite deposition demonstrate lower
efficiency and need more process development and optimizations. So the
following analysis for each functional layer will only include sub cell size

Fig. 6. . (a) I-V metrics data of devices (spin coating deposited sub cell devices only) using different types of ETLs are plotted by publication submission date. The
time series I-V metrics data are grouped and shown in (b) for comparison.

25
J. Ma and D. Guo
Fig. 7. . (a) I-V metrics data of devices (spin coating deposited sub cell devices only) using different absorber compositions are plotted by publication submission
date. The time series I-V metrics data are grouped and shown in (b) for comparison.
devices using spin coating method for absorber deposition.
Transparent conductive oxide (TCO) layer provides a conductive
pathway for electron collection in perovskite solar cells (Hamelmann,
2014). TCO layer thus needs high transparency and low resistivity. Two
types of TCO are used in the certified devices and are both commercially
available: fluorine doped tin oxide (FTO) (42 certified devices) and in­
dium doped tin oxide (ITO) (27 certified devices). ITO gained its
popularity since 2016 and are more frequently adopted in a planar n-i-p
type structure. Temporal data analysis shows that devices adopting
either ITO or FTO as the TCO layer could achieve record efficiency
(Fig. 5a). Previous studies show solar cell TCO transparency and re­
sistivity can affect device Jsc and FF (Müller et al., 2004). However,
analysis shows small differences in Jsc and FF between devices using
different types of TCO (median Jsc 23.81 mA/cm2 ITO vs 24.71 mA/cm2
FTO; median FF 77.4% ITO vs 78.4% FTO) (Fig. 5b). It is noticed that
none of the certified device publications were devoted to the TCO layer
development and optimization. Future studies on TCO optimization of
their properties (transparency, resistivity, band structure alignment and
interface) could potentially boost efficiency for new record perovskite
solar cell.
Electron transport layer functions in extracting photo-generated
electrons and aligning interfacial energy level (Zheng et al., 2019).
Mesoporous TiO2 was exclusively used as ETL in certified perovskite
solar cells before 2016. Afterwards, non-porous SnO2 and TiO2 gradually
gained popularity. Among the 69 certified devices, 28 devices use a
combination of a compact (non-porous) TiO2 layer and a mesoporous
TiO2 layer as scaffold for perovskite absorber. 31 devices only use
nonporous metal oxide such as SnO2 or TiO2 as the electron transport
layer. Alternative organic based materials such as C60 derivatives are
also demonstrated in the rest 11 solar cells (Fig. 6a). Analysis shows that
the non-porous metal oxide based ETL solar cells efficiency is lower
compared to those using mesoporous ETL layers (median efficiency:
non-porous ETL devices 20.5% vs mp-TiO2 ETL devices 21.7%). How­
ever, the record efficiency produced from these two types ETLs is closely
matched (maximum efficiency: non-porous ETL devices 23.32% vs mp-
TiO2 ETL devices 23.48%) (Fig. 6b). Both type of ETLs could potentially
achieve the record efficiency.
The perovskite absorber layer absorb photons and converted them to
carriers for extraction (Jena et al., 2019). It is the single most critical
26
Solar Energy 209 (2020) 21–29
component in a perovskite solar cell. In the very first perovskite solar
cell report, CH3NH3PbBr3 (MAPbBr3) and CH3NH3PbI3 (MAPbI3) were
investigated as a sensitizer for solar cells (Kojima et al., 2009). Following
that report, anion (Br- in the case of MAPbBr3) and cation (MA+ in the
case of MAPbBr3) chemistry are heavily investigated for perovskite
composition (Ono et al., 2017). These researches contribute to the rapid
perovskite solar cell efficiency improvements. It is noticed that the
practice of mixed bromine and iodine anion composition is adopted
among nearly all certified solar cells. This practice enables band gap
tuning to optimize the light absorbance over the full visible light spec­
trum. Turning to cation composition, it is observed that cation MA
(methylammonium) could be partially substituted by FA (for­
mamidinium) or a combination of FA and inorganic cation such as Cs+,
Rb+ or K+. The above anion and cation compositional engineering
combined lead to five major compositions among the certified perov­
skite solar cells: MAPbX3 (X = I,Br) (20 devices), FAPbX3 (X = I,Br) (5
devices), (FA,MA)PbX3 (X = I,Br) (29 devices) and (FA,MA,Cs)PbX3 (X
= I,Br) (13 devices) and CsPbX3(X = I,Br) (2 devices). Out of all 69
certified solar cells, >90% use the following three formulations:
MAPbX3 (X = I,Br), (FA,MA)PbX3 (x = I,Br) and (FA,MA,Cs)PbX3 (X = I,
Br). An comparison over the three most used formulations shows that
partially substituting MA with FA improves the overall efficiency (me­
dian efficiency MAPbX3 vs (FA,MA)PbX3: 20.20% vs 21.02%) (Fig. 7a).
The efficiency improvement is mostly gained through Jsc (median Jsc
MAPbX3 vs (FA,MA)PbX3: 23.17 mA/cm2 vs 24.31 mA/cm2) and FF
(median FF MAPbX3 vs (FA,MA)PbX3: 75.0% vs 78.2%). However,
adding Cs to (FA,MA)PbX3(X = Br,I) does not further improve the effi­
ciency (median efficiency (FA,MA)PbX3 vs (FA,MA,Cs)PbX3 21.0% vs
21.0%) (Fig. 7b). Recent literature indicated the role of Cs are more
likely related to the overall stability improvement of perovskite based
device (Tang et al., 2020). The stable and active perovskite phase of
FAPbX3 (α phase) and CsPbX3 (β phase) has previously been a challenge
to synthesize and prone to phase degradation at room temperature due
to the large cation size (Yong Wang et al., 2019c; Zhang et al., 2020).
Only until very recently these phases are successfully obtained and
certified. It is worth noting that FAPbX3 based devices could reach ef­
ficiency comparable to the devices based on (FA,MA)PbX3 with
matching Voc, Jsc and FF.
Hole transport layer transports the photogenerated holes towards
J. Ma and D. Guo Solar Energy 209 (2020) 21–29

Fig. 8. . (a) I-V metrics data of devices (spin coating deposited sub cell devices only) using different types of HTLs are plotted by publication submission date. The
time series I-V metrics data are grouped and shown in (b) for comparison.

conductive electrode and align the interface band energy with the 1. Notes
perovskite absorber (Lee et al., 2019). One single material, 2,2′ ,7,7′ -
tetrakis[N,N-di(4-methoxyphenyl)amino]-9,9′ -spirobifluorene (spiro- The authors declare no competing financial interest
OMeTAD), is prevalently used as HTL in perovskite solar cells. 44 out of
69 devices used spiro-OMeTAD as the hole transport layer with the Funding
addition of lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI) and 4-
tert-butylpyridine (tBP) to improve its conductivity. A few other types of This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
materials such as polythiophene, poly[bis(4-phenyl)(2,4,6- agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
trimethylphenyl)amine (PTAA) and NiOx are also being explored. An
analysis of the I-V metrics HTL materials used shows that alternative Declaration of Competing Interest
HTL material can achieve a similar efficiency compared to the
commonly used spiro-OMeTAD (Fig. 8a, b). PTAA and polythiophene- The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
based HTL could result solar cell efficiencies similar to those based on interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
spiro-OMeTAD. Recent literature suggested that spiro-OMeTAD could the work reported in this paper.
lead to lower device stability due to moisture ingression (Jena et al.,
2018). Efforts are needed for exploring and optimizing alternative HTL
Acknowledgements
materials without compromising the overall device efficiency and
stability.
The authors would like to thank Dr. Joe Berry (NREL) and Dr. Zhibo
The analysis on the device aperture size, device architecture,
Zhao (First Solar) for feedbacks and helpful discussions.
perovskite deposition method and the components materials reveals
insights that are not obvious from single perovskite study. There are still
Appendix A. Supplementary data
great challenges ahead for scaling up the size of perovskite device and
achieve high efficiency for commercial success. Deposition method is
The certified perovskite solar cell data set is available online as a
only one of the obvious issues in device process scaling up. Alternative
supplementary file. Authors plan to continue updating the table when
methods to spin coating for the deposition of perovskite and HTL/ETL
more certified devices are available. The dataset will be accessible on
layers needs to be systematically explored and optimized before the final
Mendeley Data, an open research data repository (https://doi.org/
assessment for the best approach. Other issues such as device unifor­
10.17632/b2nzxmr56s). Supplementary data to this article can also be
mity, laser scribing and encapsulation all need to be considered for
found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.08.090.
scaling up. Equally important is the assessment on materials and
chemistry for device structures and all functional layers. Many alter­
References
native materials could potentially be beneficial on efficiency and other
performance metrics (stability, temperature coefficient, etc.). The Abuhelaiqa, M., Paek, S., Lee, Y., Cho, K.T., Heo, S., Oveisi, E., Huckaba, A.J., Kanda, H.,
widespread use of a certain material could simply be traced back to Kim, H., Zhang, Y., Humphry-Baker, R., Kinge, S., Asiri, A.M., Nazeeruddin, M.K.,
historical reason. A more systematic experimental assessment on all 2019. Stable perovskite solar cells using tin acetylacetonate based electron
transporting layers. Energy Environ. Sci. 12 (6), 1910–1917.
previously demonstrated materials in perovskite device should be Bi, D., Luo, J., Zhang, F., Magrez, A., Athanasopoulou, E.N., Hagfeldt, A., Grätzel, M.,
planned in the near future. 2017a. Morphology engineering: a route to highly reproducible and high efficiency
perovskite solar cells. ChemSusChem 10 (7), 1624–1630.
Bi, D., Yi, C., Luo, J., Décoppet, J.-D., Zhang, F., Zakeeruddin, Shaik M., Li, X.,
Hagfeldt, A., Grätzel, M., 2016. Polymer-templated nucleation and crystal growth of
perovskite films for solar cells with efficiency greater than 21%. Nat. Energy 1 (10),
16142.

27
J. Ma and D. Guo
Bi, E., Chen, H., Xie, F., Wu, Y., Chen, W., Su, Y., Islam, A., Grätzel, M., Yang, X., Han, L.,
2017b. Diffusion engineering of ions and charge carriers for stable efficient
perovskite solar cells. Nat. Commun. 8 (1), 15330.
Bishop, J.E., Mohamad, D.K., Wong-Stringer, M., Smith, A., Lidzey, D.G., 2017. Spray-
cast multilayer perovskite solar cells with an active-area of 1.5 cm2. Sci. Rep. 7 (1),
7962.
Boyd, C.C., Cheacharoen, R., Leijtens, T., McGehee, M.D., 2019. Understanding
degradation mechanisms and improving stability of perovskite photovoltaics. Chem.
Rev. 119 (5), 3418–3451.
Bu, T., Liu, X., Li, J., Huang, W., Wu, Z., Huang, F., Cheng, Y.-B., Zhong, J., 2020.
Dynamic antisolvent engineering for spin coating of 10 × 10 cm2 perovskite solar
module approaching 18%. Sol. RRL 4 (2), 1900263.
Bu, T., Liu, X., Li, J., Li, W., Huang, W., Ku, Z., Peng, Y., Huang, F., Cheng, Y.-B.,
Zhong, J., 2019. Sub-sized monovalent alkaline cations enhanced electrical stability
for over 17% hysteresis-free planar perovskite solar mini-module. Electrochim. Acta
306, 635–642.
Burschka, J., Pellet, N., Moon, S.-J., Humphry-Baker, R., Gao, P., Nazeeruddin, M.K.,
Grätzel, M., 2013. Sequential deposition as a route to high-performance perovskite-
sensitized solar cells. Nature 499 (7458), 316–319.
Chen, H., Ye, F., Tang, W., He, J., Yin, M., Wang, Y., Xie, F., Bi, E., Yang, X., Grätzel, M.,
Han, L., 2017. A solvent- and vacuum-free route to large-area perovskite films for
efficient solar modules. Nature 550 (7674), 92–95.
Chen, W., Wu, Y., Yue, Y., Liu, J., Zhang, W., Yang, X., Chen, H., Bi, E., Ashraful, I.,
Grätzel, M., Han, L., 2015. Efficient and stable large-area perovskite solar cells with
inorganic charge extraction layers. Science 350 (6263), 944–948.
Chen, Y., Li, N., Wang, L., Li, L., Xu, Z., Jiao, H., Liu, P., Zhu, C., Zai, H., Sun, M., Zou, W.,
Zhang, S., Xing, G., Liu, X., Wang, J., Li, D., Huang, B., Chen, Q., Zhou, H., 2019.
Impacts of alkaline on the defects property and crystallization kinetics in perovskite
solar cells. Nat. Commun. 10 (1), 1112.
Chu, Q.-Q., Ding, B., Peng, J., Shen, H., Li, X., Liu, Y., Li, C.-X., Li, C.-J., Yang, G.-J.,
White, T.P., Catchpole, K.R., 2019. Highly stable carbon-based perovskite solar cell
with a record efficiency of over 18% via hole transport engineering. J. Mater. Sci.
Technol. 35 (6), 987–993.
Chung, J., Shin, S.S., Kim, G., Jeon, N.J., Yang, T.-Y., Noh, J.H., Seo, J., 2019. Impact of
electrode materials on process environmental stability of efficient perovskite solar
cells. Joule 3 (8), 1977–1985.
Cui, P., Wei, D., Ji, J., Huang, H., Jia, E., Dou, S., Wang, T., Wang, W., Li, M., 2019.
Planar p–n homojunction perovskite solar cells with efficiency exceeding 21.3%.
Nat. Energy 4 (2), 150–159.
Dai, X., Xu, K., Wei, F., 2020. Recent progress in perovskite solar cells: the perovskite
layer. Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 11, 51–60.
Deng, Y., Van Brackle, C.H., Dai, X., Zhao, J., Chen, B., Huang, J., 2019. Tailoring solvent
coordination for high-speed, room-temperature blading of perovskite photovoltaic
films. Sci. Adv. 5 (12), eaax7537.
Ding, B., Huang, S.-Y., Chu, Q.-Q., Li, Y., Li, C.-X., Li, C.-J., Yang, G.-J., 2018. Low-
temperature SnO2-modified TiO2 yields record efficiency for normal planar
perovskite solar modules. J. Mater. Chem. A 6 (22), 10233–10242.
Dunbar, R.B., Duck, B.C., Moriarty, T., Anderson, K.F., Duffy, Noel W., Fell, C.J., Kim, J.,
Ho-Baillie, A., Vak, D., Duong, T., Wu, Y., Weber, K., Pascoe, A., Cheng, Y.-B.,
Lin, Q., Burn, P.L., Bhattacharjee, R., Wang, H., Wilson, G.J., 2017. How reliable are
efficiency measurements of perovskite solar cells? The first inter-comparison,
between two accredited and eight non-accredited laboratories. J. Mater. Chem. A 5
(43), 22542–22558.
Green, M.A., Dunlop, E.D., Hohl-Ebinger, J., Yoshita, M., Kopidakis, N., Ho-Baillie, A.W.
Y., 2020. Solar cell efficiency tables (Version 55). Prog. Photovoltaics 28 (1), 3–15.
Hamelmann, F.U., 2014. Transparent conductive oxides in thin film photovoltaics.
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 559, 012016.
Hang, P., Xie, J., Li, G., Wang, Y., Fang, D., Yao, Y., Xie, D., Cui, C., Yan, K., Xu, J.,
Yang, D., Yu, X., 2019. An interlayer with strong Pb-Cl bond delivers ultraviolet-
filter-free, efficient, and photostable perovskite solar cells. iScience 21, 217–227.
Huang, F., Li, M., Siffalovic, P., Cao, G., Tian, J., 2019. From scalable solution fabrication
of perovskite films towards commercialization of solar cells. Energy Environ. Sci. 12
(2), 518–549.
Jena, A.K., Kulkarni, A., Miyasaka, T., 2019. Halide perovskite photovoltaics:
background, status, and future prospects. Chem. Rev. 119 (5), 3036–3103.
Jena, A.K., Numata, Y., Ikegami, M., Miyasaka, T., 2018. Role of spiro-OMeTAD in
performance deterioration of perovskite solar cells at high temperature and reuse of
the perovskite films to avoid Pb-waste. J. Mater. Chem. A 6 (5), 2219–2230.
Jeon, N.J., Na, H., Jung, E.H., Yang, T.-Y., Lee, Y.G., Kim, G., Shin, H.-W., Il Seok, S.,
Lee, J., Seo, J., 2018. A fluorene-terminated hole-transporting material for highly
efficient and stable perovskite solar cells. Nat. Energy 3 (8), 682–689.
Jeon, N.J., Noh, J.H., Kim, Y.C., Yang, W.S., Ryu, S., Seok, S.I., 2014. Solvent engineering
for high-performance inorganic–organic hybrid perovskite solar cells. Nat. Mater. 13
(9), 897–903.
Jiang, Q., Chu, Z., Wang, P., Yang, X., Liu, H., Wang, Y., Yin, Z., Wu, J., Zhang, X.,
You, J., 2017. Planar-structure perovskite solar cells with efficiency beyond 21%.
Adv. Mater. 29 (46), 1703852.
Jiang, Q., Zhang, L., Wang, H., Yang, X., Meng, J., Liu, H., Yin, Z., Wu, J., Zhang, X.,
You, J., 2016. Enhanced electron extraction using SnO2 for high-efficiency planar-
structure HC(NH2)2PbI3-based perovskite solar cells. Nat. Energy 2 (1), 16177.
Jiang, Q., Zhao, Y., Zhang, X., Yang, X., Chen, Y., Chu, Z., Ye, Q., Li, X., Yin, Z., You, J.,
2019. Surface passivation of perovskite film for efficient solar cells. Nat. Photonics
13 (7), 460–466.
Jung, E.H., Jeon, N.J., Park, E.Y., Moon, C.S., Shin, T.J., Yang, T.-Y., Noh, J.H., Seo, J.,
2019. Efficient, stable and scalable perovskite solar cells using poly(3-
hexylthiophene). Nature 567 (7749), 511–515.
28
Solar Energy 209 (2020) 21–29
Khenkin, M.V., Katz, E.A., Abate, A., Bardizza, G., Berry, J.J., Brabec, C., Brunetti, F.,
Bulović, V., Burlingame, Q., Di Carlo, A., Cheacharoen, R., Cheng, Y.-B.,
Colsmann, A., Cros, S., Domanski, K., Dusza, M., Fell, C.J., Forrest, S.R., Galagan, Y.,
Di Girolamo, D., Grätzel, M., Hagfeldt, A., von Hauff, E., Hoppe, H., Kettle, J.,
Köbler, H., Leite, M.S., Liu, S., Loo, Y.-L., Luther, J.M., Ma, C.-Q., Madsen, M.,
Manceau, M., Matheron, M., McGehee, M., Meitzner, R., Nazeeruddin, M.K.,
Nogueira, A.F., Odabaşı, Ç., Osherov, A., Park, N.-G., Reese, M.O., De Rossi, F.,
Saliba, M., Schubert, U.S., Snaith, H.J., Stranks, S.D., Tress, W., Troshin, P.A.,
Turkovic, V., Veenstra, S., Visoly-Fisher, I., Walsh, A., Watson, T., Xie, H.,
Yıldırım, R., Zakeeruddin, S.M., Zhu, K., Lira-Cantu, M., 2020. Consensus statement
for stability assessment and reporting for perovskite photovoltaics based on ISOS
procedures. Nat. Energy 5 (1), 35–49.
Kim, D.H., Whitaker, J.B., Li, Z., van Hest, M.F.A.M., Zhu, K., 2018. Outlook and
challenges of perovskite solar cells toward terawatt-scale photovoltaic module
technology. Joule 2 (8), 1437–1451.
Kim, H., Lee, S.-U., Lee, D.Y., Paik, M.J., Na, H., Lee, J., Seok, S.I., 2019a. Optimal
interfacial engineering with different length of alkylammonium halide for efficient
and stable perovskite solar cells. Adv. Energy Mater. 9 (47), 1902740.
Kim, J., Yun, J.S., Cho, Y., Lee, D.S., Wilkinson, B., Soufiani, A.M., Deng, X., Zheng, J.,
Shi, A., Lim, S., Chen, S., Hameiri, Z., Zhang, M., Lau, C.F.J., Huang, S., Green, M.A.,
Ho-Baillie, A.W.Y., 2017. Overcoming the challenges of large-area high-efficiency
perovskite solar cells. ACS Energy Lett. 2 (9), 1978–1984.
Kim, M., Kim, G.-H., Lee, T.K., Choi, I.W., Choi, H.W., Jo, Y., Yoon, Y.J., Kim, J.W.,
Lee, J., Huh, D., Lee, H., Kwak, S.K., Kim, J.Y., Kim, D.S., 2019b. Methylammonium
chloride induces intermediate phase stabilization for efficient perovskite solar cells.
Joule 3 (9), 2179–2192.
Kojima, A., Teshima, K., Shirai, Y., Miyasaka, T., 2009. Organometal halide perovskites
as visible-light sensitizers for photovoltaic cells. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 131 (17),
6050–6051.
Lee, I., Rolston, N., Brunner, P.-L., Dauskardt, R.H., 2019. Hole-Transport layer
molecular weight and doping effects on perovskite solar cell efficiency and
mechanical behavior. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11 (26), 23757–23764.
Lee, J.-W., Dai, Z., Han, T.-H., Choi, C., Chang, S.-Y., Lee, S.-J., De Marco, N., Zhao, H.,
Sun, P., Huang, Y., Yang, Y., 2018. 2D perovskite stabilized phase-pure
formamidinium perovskite solar cells. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 3021.
Li, K., Xiao, J., Yu, X., Bu, T., Li, T., Deng, X., Liu, S., Wang, J., Ku, Z., Zhong, J.,
Huang, F., Zhong, Z., Peng, Y., Li, W., Cheng, Y., 2018. Influence of hot spot heating
on stability of large size perovskite solar module with a power conversion efficiency
of ~14%. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 1 (8), 3565–3570.
Li, N., Tao, S., Chen, Y., Niu, X., Onwudinanti, C.K., Hu, C., Qiu, Z., Xu, Z., Zheng, G.,
Wang, L., Zhang, Y., Li, L., Liu, H., Lun, Y., Hong, J., Wang, X., Liu, Y., Xie, H.,
Gao, Y., Bai, Y., Yang, S., Brocks, G., Chen, Q., Zhou, H., 2019. Cation and anion
immobilization through chemical bonding enhancement with fluorides for stable
halide perovskite solar cells. Nat. Energy 4 (5), 408–415.
Li, X., Bi, D., Yi, C., Décoppet, J.-D., Luo, J., Zakeeruddin, S.M., Hagfeldt, A., Grätzel, M.,
2016. A vacuum flash–assisted solution process for high-efficiency large-area
perovskite solar cells. Science 8060.
Liu, C., Zhang, L., Zhou, X., Gao, J., Chen, W., Wang, X., Xu, B., 2019. Hydrothermally
treated SnO2 as the electron transport layer in high-efficiency flexible perovskite
solar cells with a certificated efficiency of 17.3%. Adv. Funct. Mater. 29 (47),
1807604.
Liu, M., Johnston, M.B., Snaith, H.J., 2013. Efficient planar heterojunction perovskite
solar cells by vapour deposition. Nature 501 (7467), 395–398.
Lu, J., Jiang, L., Li, W., Li, F., Pai, N.K., Scully, A.D., Tsai, C.-M., Bach, U., Simonov, A.N.,
Cheng, Y.-B., Spiccia, L., 2017. Diammonium and monoammonium mixed-organic-
cation perovskites for high performance solar cells with improved stability. Adv.
Energy Mater. 7 (18), 1700444.
Matsui, T., Yamamoto, T., Nishihara, T., Morisawa, R., Yokoyama, T., Sekiguchi, T.,
Negami, T., 2019. Compositional engineering for thermally stable, highly efficient
perovskite solar cells exceeding 20% power conversion efficiency with 85 ◦ C/85%
1000 h stability. Adv. Mater. 31 (10), 1806823.
Mei, A., Li, X., Liu, L., Ku, Z., Liu, T., Rong, Y., Xu, M., Hu, M., Chen, J., Yang, Y.,
Grätzel, M., Han, H., 2014. A hole-conductor–free, fully printable mesoscopic
perovskite solar cell with high stability. Science 345 (6194), 295–298.
Müller, J., Rech, B., Springer, J., Vanecek, M., 2004. TCO and light trapping in silicon
thin film solar cells. Sol. Energy 77 (6), 917–930.
Niu, X., Li, N., Zhu, C., Liu, L., Zhao, Y., Ge, Y., Chen, Y., Xu, Z., Lu, Y., Sui, M., Li, Y.,
Tarasov, A., Goodilin, E.A., Zhou, H., Chen, Q., 2019. Temporal and spatial pinhole
constraints in small-molecule hole transport layers for stable and efficient perovskite
photovoltaics. J. Mater. Chem. A 7 (13), 7338–7346.
Ono, L.K., Juarez-Perez, E.J., Qi, Y., 2017. Progress on perovskite materials and solar
cells with mixed cations and halide anions. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 9 (36),
30197–30246.
Priyadarshi, A., Haur, L.J., Murray, P., Fu, D., Kulkarni, S., Xing, G., Sum, T.C.,
Mathews, N., Mhaisalkar, S.G., 2016. A large area (70 cm2) monolithic perovskite
solar module with a high efficiency and stability. Energy Environ. Sci. 9 (12),
3687–3692.
Quan, L.N., Yuan, M., Comin, R., Voznyy, O., Beauregard, E.M., Hoogland, S., Buin, A.,
Kirmani, A.R., Zhao, K., Amassian, A., Kim, D.H., Sargent, E.H., 2016. Ligand-
stabilized reduced-dimensionality perovskites. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138 (8),
2649–2655.
Rong, Y., Hu, Y., Mei, A., Tan, H., Saidaminov, M.I., Seok, S.I., McGehee, M.D.,
Sargent, E.H., Han, H., 2018. Challenges for commercializing perovskite solar cells.
Science 361 (6408), 8235.
Schulz, P., Cahen, D., Kahn, A., 2019. Halide perovskites: is it all about the interfaces?
Chem. Rev. 119 (5), 3349–3417.
J. Ma and D. Guo
Shen, C., Wu, Y., Zhang, S., Wu, T., Tian, H., Zhu, W.-H., Han, L., 2020. Stabilizing
formamidinium lead iodide perovskite by sulfonyl-functionalized
phenethylammonium salt via crystallization control and surface passivation. Sol.
RRL 4 (5), 2000069.
Stolterfoht, M., Wolff, C.M., Márquez, J.A., Zhang, S., Hages, C.J., Rothhardt, D.,
Albrecht, S., Burn, P.L., Meredith, P., Unold, T., Neher, D., 2018. Visualization and
suppression of interfacial recombination for high-efficiency large-area pin perovskite
solar cells. Nat. Energy 3 (10), 847–854.
Tan, H., Jain, A., Voznyy, O., Lan, X., García de Arquer, F.P., Fan, J.Z., Quintero-
Bermudez, R., Yuan, M., Zhang, B., Zhao, Y., Fan, F., Li, P., Quan, L.N., Zhao, Y.,
Lu, Z.-H., Yang, Z., Hoogland, S., Sargent, E.H., 2017. Efficient and stable solution-
processed planar perovskite solar cells via contact passivation. Science 355 (6326),
722–726.
Tang, S., Huang, S., Wilson, G.J., Ho-Baillie, A., 2020. Progress and opportunities for Cs
incorporated perovskite photovoltaics. Trends Chem.
Urbina, A., 2020. The balance between efficiency, stability and environmental impacts in
perovskite solar cells: a review. JPhys Energy 2 (2), 022001.
Wagner, L., Chacko, S., Mathiazhagan, G., Mastroianni, S., Hinsch, A., 2018. High
photovoltage of 1 V on a steady-state certified hole transport layer-free perovskite
solar cell by a molten-salt approach. ACS Energy Lett. 3 (5), 1122–1127.
Wang, J., Zhang, J., Zhou, Y., Liu, H., Xue, Q., Li, X., Chueh, C.-C., Yip, H.-L., Zhu, Z.,
Jen, A.K.Y., 2020a. Highly efficient all-inorganic perovskite solar cells with
suppressed non-radiative recombination by a Lewis base. Nat. Commun. 11 (1), 177.
Wang, L., Zhou, H., Hu, J., Huang, B., Sun, M., Dong, B., Zheng, G., Huang, Y., Chen, Y.,
Li, L., Xu, Z., Li, N., Liu, Z., Chen, Q., Sun, L.-D., Yan, C.-H., 2019a. A Eu3+-Eu2+ ion
redox shuttle imparts operational durability to Pb-I perovskite solar cells. Science
363 (6424), 265–270.
Wang, P., Li, R., Chen, B., Hou, F., Zhang, J., Zhao, Y., Zhang, X., 2020b. Gradient energy
alignment engineering for planar perovskite solar cells with efficiency over 23%.
Adv. Mater. 32 (6), 1905766.
Wang, R., Mujahid, M., Duan, Y., Wang, Z.-K., Xue, J., Yang, Y., 2019b. A review of
perovskites solar cell stability. Adv. Funct. Mater. 29 (47), 1808843.
Wang, Y., Dar, M.I., Ono, L.K., Zhang, T., Kan, M., Li, Y., Zhang, L., Wang, X., Yang, Y.,
Gao, X., Qi, Y., Grätzel, M., Zhao, Y., 2019c. Thermodynamically stabilized
β-CsPbI3–based perovskite solar cells with efficiencies >18%. Science 365 (6453),
591–595.
Wang, Y., Liu, X., Zhou, Z., Ru, P., Chen, H., Yang, X., Han, L., 2019d. Reliable
measurement of perovskite solar cells. Adv. Mater. 31 (47), 1803231.
Wei, D., Ma, F., Wang, R., Dou, S., Cui, P., Huang, H., Ji, J., Jia, E., Jia, X., Sajid, S.,
Elseman, A.M., Chu, L., Li, Y., Jiang, B., Qiao, J., Yuan, Y., Li, M., 2018. Ion-
migration inhibition by the cation–π interaction in perovskite materials for efficient
and stable perovskite solar cells. Adv. Mater. 30 (31), 1707583.
Wu, Y., Xie, F., Chen, H., Yang, X., Su, H., Cai, M., Zhou, Z., Noda, T., Han, L., 2017.
Thermally stable MAPbI3 perovskite solar cells with efficiency of 19.19% and area
over 1 cm2 achieved by additive engineering. Adv. Mater. 29 (28), 1701073.
Wu, Y., Yang, X., Chen, W., Yue, Y., Cai, M., Xie, F., Bi, E., Islam, A., Han, L., 2016.
Perovskite solar cells with 18.21% efficiency and area over 1 cm2 fabricated by
heterojunction engineering. Nat. Energy 1 (11), 16148.
Xie, J., Hang, P., Wang, H., Zhao, S., Li, G., Fang, Y., Liu, F., Guo, X., Zhu, H., Lu, X.,
Yu, X., Chan, C.C.S., Wong, K.S., Yang, D., Xu, J., Yan, K., 2019. Perovskite
bifunctional device with improved electroluminescent and photovoltaic performance
through interfacial energy-band engineering. Adv. Mater. 31 (33), 1902543.
Xu, Z., Liu, Z., Li, N., Tang, G., Zheng, G., Zhu, C., Chen, Y., Wang, L., Huang, Y., Li, L.,
Zhou, N., Hong, J., Chen, Q., Zhou, H., 2019. A Thermodynamically favored crystal
orientation in mixed formamidinium/methylammonium perovskite for efficient
solar cells. Adv. Mater. 31 (24), 1900390.
29
Solar Energy 209 (2020) 21–29
Yang, D., Yang, R., Wang, K., Wu, C., Zhu, X., Feng, J., Ren, X., Fang, G., Priya, S., Liu, S.,
2018. High efficiency planar-type perovskite solar cells with negligible hysteresis
using EDTA-complexed SnO2. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 3239.
Yang, D., Zhou, X., Yang, R., Yang, Z., Yu, W., Wang, X., Li, C., Liu, S., Chang, R.P.H.,
2016. Surface optimization to eliminate hysteresis for record efficiency planar
perovskite solar cells. Energy Environ. Sci. 9 (10), 3071–3078.
Yang, W.S., Noh, J.H., Jeon, N.J., Kim, Y.C., Ryu, S., Seo, J., Seok, S.I., 2015. High-
performance photovoltaic perovskite layers fabricated through intramolecular
exchange. Science 348 (6240), 1234–1237.
Yang, W.S., Park, B.-W., Jung, E.H., Jeon, N.J., Kim, Y.C., Lee, D.U., Shin, S.S., Seo, J.,
Kim, E.K., Noh, J.H., Seok, S.I., 2017. Iodide management in formamidinium-lead-
halide–based perovskite layers for efficient solar cells. Science 356 (6345),
1376–1379.
Yoo, J.J., Wieghold, S., Sponseller, M.C., Chua, M.R., Bertram, S.N., Hartono, N.T.P.,
Tresback, J.S., Hansen, E.C., Correa-Baena, J.-P., Bulović, V., Buonassisi, T., Shin, S.
S., Bawendi, M.G., 2019. An interface stabilized perovskite solar cell with high
stabilized efficiency and low voltage loss. Energy Environ. Sci. 12 (7), 2192–2199.
Zhang, L., Liu, C., Wang, X., Tian, Y., Jen, A.K.Y., Xu, B., 2019. Side-Chain engineering
on dopant-free hole-transporting polymers toward highly efficient perovskite solar
cells (20.19%). Adv. Funct. Mater. 29 (39), 1904856.
Zhang, L., Liu, C., Zhang, J., Li, X., Cheng, C., Tian, Y., Jen, A.K.-Y., Xu, B., 2018.
Intensive exposure of functional rings of a polymeric hole-transporting material
enables efficient perovskite solar cells. Adv. Mater. 30 (39), 1804028.
Zhang, Y., Seo, S., Lim, S.Y., Kim, Y., Kim, S.-G., Lee, D.-K., Lee, S.-H., Shin, H.,
Cheong, H., Park, N.-G., 2020. Achieving reproducible and high-efficiency (>21%)
perovskite solar cells with a presynthesized FAPbI3 powder. ACS Energy Lett. 5 (2),
360–366.
Zheng, S., Wang, G., Liu, T., Lou, L., Xiao, S., Yang, S., 2019. Materials and structures for
the electron transport layer of efficient and stable perovskite solar cells. Sci. China:
Chem. 62 (7), 800–809.
Zheng, X., Chen, B., Dai, J., Fang, Y., Bai, Y., Lin, Y., Wei, H., Zeng, Xiao C., Huang, J.,
2017. Defect passivation in hybrid perovskite solar cells using quaternary
ammonium halide anions and cations. Nat. Energy 2 (7), 17102.
Zheng, X., Hou, Y., Bao, C., Yin, J., Yuan, F., Huang, Z., Song, K., Liu, J., Troughton, J.,
Gasparini, N., Zhou, C., Lin, Y., Xue, D.-J., Chen, B., Johnston, A.K., Wei, N.,
Hedhili, M.N., Wei, M., Alsalloum, A.Y., Maity, P., Turedi, B., Yang, C., Baran, D.,
Anthopoulos, T.D., Han, Y., Lu, Z.-H., Mohammed, O.F., Gao, F., Sargent, E.H.,
Bakr, O.M., 2020. Managing grains and interfaces via ligand anchoring enables
22.3%-efficiency inverted perovskite solar cells. Nat. Energy 5 (2), 131–140.
Zhu, C., Niu, X., Fu, Y., Li, N., Hu, C., Chen, Y., He, X., Na, G., Liu, P., Zai, H., Ge, Y.,
Lu, Y., Ke, X., Bai, Y., Yang, S., Chen, P., Li, Y., Sui, M., Zhang, L., Zhou, H., Chen, Q.,
2019. Strain engineering in perovskite solar cells and its impacts on carrier
dynamics. Nat. Commun. 10 (1), 815.
Zhu, X., Xu, Z., Zuo, S., Feng, J., Wang, Z., Zhang, X., Zhao, K., Zhang, J., Liu, H.,
Priya, S., Liu, S.F., Yang, D., 2018. Vapor-fumigation for record efficiency two-
dimensional perovskite solar cells with superior stability. Energy Environ. Sci. 11
(12), 3349–3357.
Zimmermann, E., Wong, K.K., Müller, M., Hu, H., Ehrenreich, P., Kohlstädt, M.,
Würfel, U., Mastroianni, S., Mathiazhagan, G., Hinsch, A., Gujar, T.P., Thelakkat, M.,
Pfadler, T., Schmidt-Mende, L., 2016. Characterization of perovskite solar cells:
towards a reliable measurement protocol. APL Mater. 4 (9), 091901.
Zuo, C., Scully, A.D., Vak, D., Tan, W., Jiao, X., McNeill, C.R., Angmo, D., Ding, L.,
Gao, M., 2019. Self-assembled 2D perovskite layers for efficient printable solar cells.
Adv. Energy Mater. 9 (4), 1803258.