Science China Materials

, Volume 62, Issue 6, pp 776–789 | Cite as

Kelvin probe force microscopy for perovskite solar cells

  • Zhuo Kang (康卓)
  • Haonan Si (司浩楠)Email author
  • Mingyue Shi (时明月)
  • Chenzhe Xu (徐晨哲)
  • Wenqiang Fan (范文强)
  • Shuangfei Ma (马双飞)
  • Ammarah Kausar
  • Qingliang Liao (廖庆亮)
  • Zheng Zhang (张铮)
  • Yue Zhang (张跃)Email author


Kelvin probe force microscopy (KPFM) could identify the local work function of surface at nanoscale with high-resolution on the basis of simultaneous visualization of surface topography, which provides a unique route to in-situ study of the surface information like the composition and electronic states. Currently, as a non-destructive detection protocol, KPFM demonstrates the unique potential to probe the basic nature of perovskite materials that is extremely sensitive to water, oxygen and electron beam irradiation. This paper systematically introduces the fundamentals and working mode of KPFM, and elaborates the promising applications in perovskite solar cells for energy band structures and carrier transport dynamics, trap states, crystal phases, as well as ion migration explorations. The comprehensive understanding of such potential detection engineering may provide novel and effective approaches for unraveling the unique properties of perovskite solar cells.


Kelvin probe force microscopy perovskite solar cells carrier transport dynamics trap states ion migration 



开尔文探针力显微镜在获得样品表面形貌的基础上可同时得到表面功函数, 且具有纳米级高分辨率, 是原位探究样品表面信息的有效表征手段. 目前, 开尔文探针力显微镜作为一种无损检测手段, 在探测对水、 氧和电子束辐射极其敏感的钙钛矿材料方面显示出独特 的优势与潜力. 本论文系统地介绍了开尔文探针力显微镜的基本原理和工作模式, 并深入地阐述了其在研究钙钛矿太阳能电池能带结构、 载流子传输动力学、 缺陷态、 晶相种类和离子迁移方面的应用前景. 开尔文探针力显微镜为揭示钙钛矿材料和太阳能电池的独特性能提供了新颖有效的方法.



This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFA0202701), the Overseas Expertise Introduction Projects for Discipline Innovation (111 project, B14003), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51527802, 51232001, 51702014 and 51372020), the National Major Research Program of China (2013CB932602), Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission (Z161100002116027), the State Key Laboratory for Advanced Metals and Materials, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (FRF-TP-18-042A1).


  1. 1.
    Sheldon MT, van de Groep J, Brown AM, et al. Plasmoelectric potentials in metal nanostructures. Science, 2014, 346: 828–831Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hoppe H, Glatzel T, Niggemann M, et al. Kelvin probe force microscopy study on conjugated polymer/fullerene bulk heterojunction organic solar cells. Nano Lett, 2005, 5: 269–274Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liu L, Li G. Electrical characterization of single-walled carbon nanotubes in organic solar cells by Kelvin probe force microscopy. Appl Phys Lett, 2010, 96: 083302Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Li M, Liu L, Xiao X, et al. The dynamic interactions between chemotherapy drugs and plasmid DNA investigated by atomic force microscopy. Sci China Mater, 2017, 60: 269–278Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kelvin LV. Contact electricity of metals. Phil Mag J Sci, 1898, 46: 82–120Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zisman WA. A new method of measuring contact potential differences in metals. Rev Sci Instruments, 1932, 3: 367–370Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nonnenmacher M, O’Boyle MP, Wickramasinghe HK. Kelvin probe force microscopy. Appl Phys Lett, 1991, 58: 2921–2923Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jiang CS, Yang M, Zhou Y, et al. Carrier separation and transport in perovskite solar cells studied by nanometre-scale profiling of electrical potential. Nat Commun, 2015, 6: 8397Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Waegele MM, Chen X, Herlihy DM, et al. How surface potential determines the kinetics of the first hole transfer of photocatalytic water oxidation. J Am Chem Soc, 2014, 136: 10632–10639Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wu MC, Chan SH, Lee KM, et al. Enhancing the efficiency of perovskite solar cells using mesoscopic zinc-doped TiO2 as the electron extraction layer through band alignment. J Mater Chem A, 2018, 6: 16920–16931Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Almadori Y, Moerman D, Martinez JL, et al. Multimodal noncontact atomic force microscopy and Kelvin probe force microscopy investigations of organolead tribromide perovskite single crystals. Beilstein J Nanotechnol, 2018, 9: 1695–1704Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jang YJ, Kim E, Ahn S, et al. Upconversion-triggered charge separation in polymer semiconductors. J Phys Chem Lett, 2017, 8: 364–369Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sun H, Chu H, Wang J, et al. Kelvin probe force microscopy study on nanotriboelectrification. Appl Phys Lett, 2010, 96: 083112Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wu H, Si H, Zhang Z, et al. All-inorganic perovskite quantum dot-monolayer MoS2 mixed-dimensional van der Waals heterostructure for ultrasensitive photodetector. Adv Sci, 2018, 5: 1801219Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li Y, Ji L, Liu R, et al. A review on morphology engineering for highly efficient and stable hybrid perovskite solar cells. J Mater Chem A, 2018, 6: 12842–12875Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yang D, Yang R, Zhang J, et al. High efficiency flexible perovskite solar cells using superior low temperature TiO2. Energy Environ Sci, 2015, 8: 3208–3214Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wu WQ, Wang Q, Fang Y, et al. Molecular doping enabled scalable blading of efficient hole-transport-layer-free perovskite solar cells. Nat Commun, 2018, 9: 1625Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhang W, Eperon GE, Snaith HJ. Metal halide perovskites for energy applications. Nat Energy, 2016, 1: 16048Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhao D, Wang C, Song Z, et al. Four-terminal all-perovskite tandem solar cells achieving power conversion efficiencies exceeding 23%. ACS Energy Lett, 2018, 3: 305–306Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Polman A, Knight M, Garnett EC, et al. Photovoltaic materials: Present efficiencies and future challenges. Science, 2016, 352: aad4424 21 Lu J, Lin X, Jiao X, et al. Interfacial benzenethiol modification facilitates charge transfer and improves stability of cm-sized metal halide perovskite solar cells with up to 20% efficiency. Energy Environ Sci, 2018, 11: 1880–1889Google Scholar
  21. 22.
    Yao D, Zhang C, Pham ND, et al. Hindered formation of photoinactive d-FAPbI3 phase and hysteresis-free mixed-cation planar heterojunction perovskite solar cells with enhanced efficiency via potassium incorporation. J Phys Chem Lett, 2018, 9: 2113–2120Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    Luo D, Yang W, Wang Z, et al. Enhanced photovoltage for inverted planar heterojunction perovskite solar cells. Science, 2018, 360: 1442–1446Google Scholar
  23. 24.
    Fang R, Wu S, Chen W, et al. [6,6]-Phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester/cerium oxide bilayer structure as efficient and stable electron transport layer for inverted perovskite solar cells. ACS Nano, 2018, 12: 2403–2414Google Scholar
  24. 25.
    Zuo C, Ding L. Solution-processed Cu2O and CuO as hole transport materials for efficient perovskite solar cells. Small, 2015, 11: 5528–5532Google Scholar
  25. 26.
    Yang M, Zhou Y, Zeng Y, et al. Square-centimeter solutionprocessed planar CH3NH3PbI3 perovskite solar cells with efficiency exceeding 15%. Adv Mater, 2015, 27: 6363–6370Google Scholar
  26. 27.
    Fan R, Zhou N, Zhang L, et al. Toward full solution processed perovskite/Si monolithic tandem solar device with PCE exceeding 20%. Sol RRL, 2017, 1: 1700149Google Scholar
  27. 28.
    Zhang H, Wang H, Zhu H, et al. Low-temperature solutionprocessed CuCrO2 hole-transporting layer for efficient and photostable perovskite solar cells. Adv Energy Mater, 2018, 8: 1702762Google Scholar
  28. 29.
    Jeong S, Seo S, Shin H. p-Type CuCrO2 particulate films as the hole transporting layer for CH3NH3PbI3 perovskite solar cells. RSC Adv, 2018, 8: 27956–27962Google Scholar
  29. 30.
    Wang Z, Gu Y, Qi J, et al. Size dependence and UV irradiation tuning of the surface potential in single conical ZnO nanowires. RSC Adv, 2015, 5: 42075–42080Google Scholar
  30. 31.
    Yang B, Brown CC, Huang J, et al. Enhancing ion migration in grain boundaries of hybrid organic-inorganic perovskites by chlorine. Adv Funct Mater, 2017, 27: 1700749Google Scholar
  31. 32.
    Bu T, Liu X, Zhou Y, et al. A novel quadruple-cation absorber for universal hysteresis elimination for high efficiency and stable perovskite solar cells. Energy Environ Sci, 2017, 10: 2509–2515Google Scholar
  32. 33.
    Draguta S, Sharia O, Yoon SJ, et al. Rationalizing the light-induced phase separation of mixed halide organic–inorganic perovskites. Nat Commun, 2017, 8: 200Google Scholar
  33. 34.
    Lee JH, Kim J, Kim G, et al. Introducing paired electric dipole layers for efficient and reproducible perovskite solar cells. Energy Environ Sci, 2018, 11: 1742–1751Google Scholar
  34. 35.
    Hoque MNF, He R, Warzywoda J, et al. Effects of moisture-based grain boundary passivation on cell performance and ionic migration in organic–inorganic halide perovskite solar cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2018, 10: 30322–30329Google Scholar
  35. 36.
    Ding J, Lian Z, Li Y, et al. The role of surface defects in photoluminescence and decay dynamics of high-quality perovskite MAPbI3 single crystals. J Phys Chem Lett, 2018, 9: 4221–4226Google Scholar
  36. 37.
    Zheng X, Deng Y, Chen B, et al. Dual functions of crystallization control and defect passivation enabled by sulfonic zwitterions for stable and efficient perovskite solar cells. Adv Mater, 2018, 30: 1803428Google Scholar
  37. 38.
    Zheng X, Chen B, Dai J, et al. Defect passivation in hybrid perovskite solar cells using quaternary ammonium halide anions and cations. Nat Energy, 2017, 2: 17102Google Scholar
  38. 39.
    Zhang F, Bi D, Pellet N, et al. Suppressing defects through the synergistic effect of a Lewis base and a Lewis acid for highly efficient and stable perovskite solar cells. Energy Environ Sci, 2018, 11: 3480–3490Google Scholar
  39. 40.
    Tang X, van den Berg M, Gu E, et al. Local observation of phase segregation in mixed-halide perovskite. Nano Lett, 2018, 18: 2172–2178Google Scholar
  40. 41.
    Li C, Tscheuschner S, Paulus F, et al. Iodine migration and its effect on hysteresis in perovskite solar cells. Adv Mater, 2016, 28: 2446–2454Google Scholar
  41. 42.
    Seol D, Jeong A, Han MH, et al. Origin of hysteresis in CH3NH3PbI3 perovskite thin films. Adv Funct Mater, 2017, 27: 1701924Google Scholar
  42. 43.
    Peng W, Aranda C, Bakr OM, et al. Quantification of ionic diffusion in lead halide perovskite single crystals. ACS Energy Lett, 2018, 3: 1477–1481Google Scholar
  43. 44.
    Huang J, Yuan Y, Shao Y, et al. Understanding the physical properties of hybrid perovskites for photovoltaic applications. Nat Rev Mater, 2017, 2: 17042Google Scholar
  44. 45.
    Zhu X, Lee J, Lu WD. Iodine vacancy redistribution in organicinorganic halide perovskite films and resistive switching effects. Adv Mater, 2017, 29: 1700527Google Scholar
  45. 46.
    Walsh A, Stranks SD. Taking control of ion transport in halide perovskite solar cells. ACS Energy Lett, 2018, 3: 1983–1990Google Scholar
  46. 47.
    Xiao J, Chang J, Li B, et al. Room temperature ferroelectricity of hybrid organic–inorganic perovskites with mixed iodine and bromine. J Mater Chem A, 2018, 6: 9665–9676Google Scholar
  47. 48.
    Long M, Zhang T, Liu M, et al. Abnormal synergetic effect of organic and halide ions on the stability and optoelectronic properties of a mixed perovskite via in situ characterizations. Adv Mater, 2018, 30: 1801562Google Scholar
  48. 49.
    Buin A, Pietsch P, Xu J, et al. Materials processing routes to trapfree halide perovskites. Nano Lett, 2014, 14: 6281–6286Google Scholar
  49. 50.
    Ji F, Pang S, Zhang L, et al. Simultaneous evolution of uniaxially oriented grains and ultralow-density grain-boundary network in CH3NH3PbI3 perovskite thin films mediated by precursor phase metastability. ACS Energy Lett, 2017, 2: 2727–2733Google Scholar
  50. 51.
    Saidaminov MI, Kim J, Jain A, et al. Suppression of atomic vacancies via incorporation of isovalent small ions to increase the stability of halide perovskite solar cells in ambient air. Nat Energy, 2018, 3: 648–654Google Scholar
  51. 52.
    Berhe TA, Su WN, Chen CH, et al. Organometal halide perovskite solar cells: degradation and stability. Energy Environ Sci, 2016, 9: 323–356Google Scholar
  52. 53.
    Lee DS, Yun JS, Kim J, et al. Passivation of grain boundaries by phenethylammonium in formamidinium-methylammonium lead halide perovskite solar cells. ACS Energy Lett, 2018, 3: 647–654Google Scholar
  53. 54.
    Yuan Y, Huang J. Ion migration in organometal trihalide perovskite and its impact on photovoltaic efficiency and stability. Acc Chem Res, 2016, 49: 286–293Google Scholar
  54. 55.
    Chen R, Fan F, Dittrich T, et al. Imaging photogenerated charge carriers on surfaces and interfaces of photocatalysts with surface photovoltage microscopy. Chem Soc Rev, 2018, 47: 8238–8262Google Scholar
  55. 56.
    Palermo V, Liscio A, Palma M, et al. Exploring nanoscale electrical and electronic properties of organic and polymeric functional materials by atomic force microscopy based approaches. Chem Commun, 2007, 295: 3326–3337Google Scholar
  56. 57.
    Sadewasser S, Glatzel T. Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy. Berlin: Springer, 2012 58 Giridharagopal R, Cox PA, Ginger DS. Functional scanning probe imaging of nanostructured solar energy materials. Acc Chem Res, 2016, 49: 1769–1776Google Scholar
  57. 59.
    Correa-Baena JP, Abate A, Saliba M, et al. The rapid evolution of highly efficient perovskite solar cells. Energy Environ Sci, 2017, 10: 710–727Google Scholar
  58. 60.
    Yoo H, Bae C, Yang Y, et al. Spatial charge separation in asymmetric structure of Au nanoparticle on TiO2 nanotube by lightinduced surface potential imaging. Nano Lett, 2014, 14: 4413–4417Google Scholar
  59. 61.
    Gratia P, Grancini G, Audinot JN, et al. Intrinsic halide segregation at nanometer scale determines the high efficiency of mixed cation/mixed halide perovskite solar cells. J Am Chem Soc, 2016, 138: 15821–15824Google Scholar
  60. 62.
    Shen Y, Chen X, Yan X, et al. Low-voltage blue light emission from n-ZnO/p-GaN heterojunction formed by RF magnetron sputtering method. Curr Appl Phys, 2014, 14: 345–348Google Scholar
  61. 63.
    Hieulle J, Stecker C, Ohmann R, et al. Scanning probe microscopy applied to organic-inorganic halide perovskite materials and solar cells. Small Methods, 2018, 2: 1700295Google Scholar
  62. 64.
    Ben CV, Cho HD, Kang TW, et al. Surface potential measurement of As-doped homojunction ZnO nanorods by Kelvin probe force microscopy. Surf Interface Anal, 2012, 44: 755–758Google Scholar
  63. 65.
    O’Boyle MP, Hwang TT, Wickramasinghe HK. Atomic force microscopy of work functions on the nanometer scale. Appl Phys Lett, 1999, 74: 2641–2642Google Scholar
  64. 66.
    Lee H, Lee W, Lee JH, et al. Surface potential analysis of nanoscale biomaterials and devices using Kelvin probe force microscopy. J Nanomaterials, 2016, 2016: 1–21Google Scholar
  65. 67.
    Handschuh-Wang S, Wang T, Zhou X. Recent advances in hybrid measurement methods based on atomic force microscopy and surface sensitive measurement techniques. RSC Adv, 2017, 7: 47464–47499Google Scholar
  66. 68.
    Salerno M, Dante S. Scanning Kelvin probe microscopy: challenges and perspectives towards increased application on biomaterials and biological samples. Materials, 2018, 11: 951Google Scholar
  67. 69.
    Palermo V, Palma M, Samorì P. Electronic characterization of organic thin films by Kelvin probe force microscopy. Adv Mater, 2006, 18: 145–164Google Scholar
  68. 70.
    Glatzel T, Sadewasser S, Lux-Steiner MC. Amplitude or frequency modulation-detection in Kelvin probe force microscopy. Appl Surf Sci, 2003, 210: 84–89Google Scholar
  69. 71.
    Melitz W, Shen J, Kummel AC, et al. Kelvin probe force microscopy and its application. Surf Sci Rep, 2011, 66: 1–27Google Scholar
  70. 72.
    Barth C, Foster AS, Henry CR, et al. Recent trends in surface characterization and chemistry with high-resolution scanning force methods. Adv Mater, 2011, 23: 477–501Google Scholar
  71. 73.
    Ranjan R, Prakash A, Singh A, et al. Effect of tantalum doping in a TiO2 compact layer on the performance of planar spiro-OMe- TAD free perovskite solar cells. J Mater Chem A, 2018, 6: 1037–1047Google Scholar
  72. 74.
    Zhang Y, Wang P, Yu X, et al. Enhanced performance and light soaking stability of planar perovskite solar cells using an aminebased fullerene interfacial modifier. J Mater Chem A, 2016, 4: 18509–18515Google Scholar
  73. 75.
    Si H, Kang Z, Liao Q, et al. Design and tailoring of patterned ZnO nanostructures for energy conversion applications. Sci China Mater, 2017, 60: 793–810Google Scholar
  74. 76.
    Fang Y, Bi C, Wang D, et al. The functions of fullerenes in hybrid perovskite solar cells. ACS Energy Lett, 2017, 2: 782–794Google Scholar
  75. 77.
    Si H, Liao Q, Zhang Z, et al. An innovative design of perovskite solar cells with Al2O3 inserting at ZnO/perovskite interface for improving the performance and stability. Nano Energy, 2016, 22: 223–231Google Scholar
  76. 78.
    Tavakoli MM, Giordano F, Zakeeruddin SM, et al. Mesoscopic oxide double layer as electron specific contact for highly efficient and UV stable perovskite photovoltaics. Nano Lett, 2018, 18: 2428–2434Google Scholar
  77. 79.
    Wu H, Kang Z, Zhang Z, et al. Interfacial charge behavior modulation in perovskite quantum dot-monolayer MoS2 0D-2D mixed-dimensional van der Waals heterostructures. Adv Funct Mater, 2018, 28: 1802015Google Scholar
  78. 80.
    Yang D, Yang R, Wang K, et al. High efficiency planar-type perovskite solar cells with negligible hysteresis using EDTAcomplexed SnO2. Nat Commun, 2018, 9: 3239Google Scholar
  79. 81.
    Lu K, Lei Y, Qi R, et al. Fermi level alignment by copper doping for efficient ITO/perovskite junction solar cells. J Mater Chem A, 2017, 5: 25211–25219Google Scholar
  80. 82.
    Panigrahi S, Jana S, Calmeiro T, et al. Imaging the anomalous charge distribution inside CsPbBr3 perovskite quantum dots sensitized solar cells. ACS Nano, 2017, 11: 10214–10221Google Scholar
  81. 83.
    Cai M, Ishida N, Li X, et al. Control of electrical potential distribution for high-performance perovskite solar cells. Joule, 2018, 2: 296–306Google Scholar
  82. 84.
    Wei W, Zhang Y, Xu Q, et al. Monolithic integration of hybrid perovskite single crystals with heterogenous substrate for highly sensitive X-ray imaging. Nat Photonics, 2017, 11: 315–321Google Scholar
  83. 85.
    Wang Y, Fullon R, Acerce M, et al. Solution-processed MoS2/ organolead trihalide perovskite photodetectors. Adv Mater, 2017, 29: 1603995Google Scholar
  84. 86.
    Li JJ, Ma JY, Ge QQ, et al. Microscopic investigation of grain boundaries in organolead halide perovskite solar cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2015, 7: 28518–28523Google Scholar
  85. 87.
    Fujihira M. Kelvin probe force microscopy of molecular surfaces. Annu Rev Mater Sci, 1999, 29: 353–380Google Scholar
  86. 88.
    Shao Y, Xiao Z, Bi C, et al. Origin and elimination of photocurrent hysteresis by fullerene passivation in CH3NH3PbI3 planar heterojunction solar cells. Nat Commun, 2014, 5: 5784Google Scholar
  87. 89.
    Adhikari N, Dubey A, Khatiwada D, et al. Interfacial study to suppress charge carrier recombination for high efficiency perovskite solar cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2015, 7: 26445–26454Google Scholar
  88. 90.
    Kronik L, Shapira Y. Surface photovoltage spectroscopy of semiconductor structures: at the crossroads of physics, chemistry and electrical engineering. Surf Interface Anal, 2001, 31: 954–965Google Scholar
  89. 91.
    Liqiang J, Xiaojun S, Jing S, et al. Review of surface photovoltage spectra of nano-sized semiconductor and its applications in heterogeneous photocatalysis. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells, 2003, 79: 133–151Google Scholar
  90. 92.
    Zhao S, Xie J, Cheng G, et al. General nondestructive passivation by 4–fluoroaniline for perovskite solar cells with improved performance and stability. Small, 2018, 14: 1803350Google Scholar
  91. 93.
    Zhang W, Pathak S, Sakai N, et al. Enhanced optoelectronic quality of perovskite thin films with hypophosphorous acid for planar heterojunction solar cells. Nat Commun, 2015, 6: 10030Google Scholar
  92. 94.
    Si H, Liao Q, Kang Z, et al. Deciphering the NH4PbI3 intermediate phase for simultaneous improvement on nucleation and crystal growth of perovskite. Adv Funct Mater, 2017, 27: 1701804Google Scholar
  93. 95.
    Li M, Yan X, Kang Z, et al. Enhanced efficiency and stability of perovskite solar cells via anti-solvent treatment in two-step deposition method. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2017, 9: 7224–7231Google Scholar
  94. 96.
    Kim HD, Ohkita H, Benten H, et al. Photovoltaic performance of perovskite solar cells with different grain sizes. Adv Mater, 2016, 28: 917–922Google Scholar
  95. 97.
    Yun JS, Kim J, Young T, et al. Humidity-induced degradation via grain boundaries of HC(NH2)2PbI3 planar perovskite solar cells. Adv Funct Mater, 2018, 28: 1705363Google Scholar
  96. 98.
    Yun JS, Ho-Baillie A, Huang S, et al. Benefit of grain boundaries in organic–inorganic halide planar perovskite solar cells. J Phys Chem Lett, 2015, 6: 875–880Google Scholar
  97. 99.
    Zhang XM, Lu MY, Zhang Y, et al. Fabrication of a highbrightness blue-light-emitting diode using a ZnO-nanowire array grown on p-GaN thin film. Adv Mater, 2009, 21: 2767–2770Google Scholar
  98. 100.
    Faraji N, Qin C, Matsushima T, et al. Grain boundary engineering of halide perovskite CH3NH3PbI3 solar cells with photochemically active additives. J Phys Chem C, 2018, 122: 4817–4821Google Scholar
  99. 101.
    Zhou Y, Game OS, Pang S, et al. Microstructures of organometal trihalide perovskites for solar cells: their evolution from solutions and characterization. J Phys Chem Lett, 2015, 6: 4827–4839Google Scholar
  100. 102.
    Cho Y, Soufiani AM, Yun JS, et al. Mixed 3D-2D passivation treatment for mixed-cation lead mixed-halide perovskite solar cells for higher efficiency and better stability. Adv Energy Mater, 2018, 8: 1703392Google Scholar
  101. 103.
    Li W, Rothmann MU, Liu A, et al. Phase segregation enhanced ion movement in efficient inorganic CsPbIBr2 solar cells. Adv Energy Mater, 2017, 7: 1700946Google Scholar
  102. 104.
    Son DY, Lee JW, Choi YJ, et al. Self-formed grain boundary healing layer for highly efficient CH3NH3PbI3 perovskite solar cells. Nat Energy, 2016, 1: 16081Google Scholar
  103. 105.
    Dymshits A, Henning A, Segev G, et al. The electronic structure of metal oxide/organo metal halide perovskite junctions in perovskite based solar cells. Sci Rep, 2015, 5: 8704Google Scholar
  104. 106.
    Jung HR, Nguyen BP, Jin HJ, et al. Surface potential mapping and n-type conductivity in organic–inorganic lead iodide crystals. CrystEngComm, 2018, 20: 6551–6556Google Scholar
  105. 107.
    Jung HR, Kim GY, Nguyen BP, et al. Optical and scanning probe identification of electronic structure and phases in CH3NH3PbBr3 crystal. J Phys Chem C, 2017, 121: 21930–21934Google Scholar
  106. 108.
    Chen S, Wen X, Yun JS, et al. Spatial distribution of lead iodide and local passivation on organo-lead halide perovskite. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2017, 9: 6072–6078Google Scholar
  107. 109.
    Li Z, Li J, Ding D, et al. Direct observation of perovskite photodetector performance enhancement by atomically thin interface engineering. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2018, 10: 36493–36504Google Scholar
  108. 110.
    Meloni S, Moehl T, Tress W, et al. Ionic polarization-induced current–voltage hysteresis in CH3NH3PbX3 perovskite solar cells. Nat Commun, 2016, 7: 10334Google Scholar
  109. 111.
    Liu Y, Renna LA, Thompson HB, et al. Role of ionic functional groups on ion transport at perovskite interfaces. Adv Energy Mater, 2017, 7: 1701235Google Scholar
  110. 112.
    Collins L, Ahmadi M, Wu T, et al. Breaking the time barrier in Kelvin probe force microscopy: fast free force reconstruction using the G-mode platform. ACS Nano, 2017, 11: 8717–8729Google Scholar
  111. 113.
    Kim YC, Jeon NJ, Noh JH, et al. Beneficial effects of PbI2 incorporated in organo-lead halide perovskite solar cells. Adv Energy Mater, 2016, 6: 1502104Google Scholar
  112. 114.
    Xiao JW, Shi C, Zhou C, et al. Contact engineering: electrode materials for highly efficient and stable perovskite solar cells. Sol RRL, 2017, 1: 1700082Google Scholar
  113. 115.
    Zhang T, Long M, Yan K, et al. Crystallinity preservation and ion migration suppression through dual ion exchange strategy for stable mixed perovskite solar cells. Adv Energy Mater, 2017, 7: 1700118Google Scholar
  114. 116.
    Shao Y, Fang Y, Li T, et al. Grain boundary dominated ion migration in polycrystalline organic–inorganic halide perovskite films. Energy Environ Sci, 2016, 9: 1752–1759Google Scholar
  115. 117.
    Hermes IM, Hou Y, Bergmann VW, et al. The interplay of contact layers: how the electron transport layer influences interfacial recombination and hole extraction in perovskite solar cells. J Phys Chem Lett, 2018, 9: 6249–6256Google Scholar
  116. 118.
    Wu F, Zhang M, Lu H, et al. Triple stimuli-responsive magnetic hollow porous carbon-based nanodrug delivery system for magnetic resonance imaging-guided synergistic photothermal/chemotherapy of cancer. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2018, 10: 21939–21949Google Scholar
  117. 119.
    Yun JS, Seidel J, Kim J, et al. Critical role of grain boundaries for ion migration in formamidinium and methylammonium lead halide perovskite solar cells. Adv Energy Mater, 2016, 6: 1600330Google Scholar
  118. 120.
    Yuan Y, Li T, Wang Q, et al. Anomalous photovoltaic effect in organic-inorganic hybrid perovskite solar cells. Sci Adv, 2017, 3: e1602164Google Scholar
  119. 121.
    Yuan Y, Chae J, Shao Y, et al. Photovoltaic switching mechanism in lateral structure hybrid perovskite solar cells. Adv Energy Mater, 2015, 5: 1500615Google Scholar
  120. 122.
    Ahmadi M, Collins L, Puretzky A, et al. Exploring anomalous polarization dynamics in organometallic halide perovskites. Adv Mater, 2018, 30: 1705298Google Scholar
  121. 123.
    Wu T, Collins L, Zhang J, et al. Photoinduced bulk polarization and its effects on photovoltaic actions in perovskite solar cells. ACS Nano, 2017, 11: 11542–11549Google Scholar
  122. 124.
    Gottesman R, Lopez-Varo P, Gouda L, et al. Dynamic phenomena at perovskite/electron-selective contact interface as interpreted from photovoltage decays. Chem, 2016, 1: 776–789Google Scholar
  123. 125.
    Zhang J, Chen R, Wu Y, et al. Extrinsic movable ions in MAPbI3 modulate energy band alignment in perovskite solar cells. Adv Energy Mater, 2017, 8: 1701981Google Scholar
  124. 126.
    Weber SAL, Hermes IM, Turren-Cruz SH, et al. How the formation of interfacial charge causes hysteresis in perovskite solar cells. Energy Environ Sci, 2018, 11: 2404–2413Google Scholar
  125. 127.
    Li Z, Xiao C, Yang Y, et al. Extrinsic ion migration in perovskite solar cells. Energy Environ Sci, 2017, 10: 1234–1242Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhuo Kang (康卓)
    • 1
  • Haonan Si (司浩楠)
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mingyue Shi (时明月)
    • 1
  • Chenzhe Xu (徐晨哲)
    • 1
  • Wenqiang Fan (范文强)
    • 1
  • Shuangfei Ma (马双飞)
    • 1
  • Ammarah Kausar
    • 1
  • Qingliang Liao (廖庆亮)
    • 1
  • Zheng Zhang (张铮)
    • 1
  • Yue Zhang (张跃)
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory for Advanced Metals and Materials, School of Materials Science and EngineeringUniversity of Science and Technology BeijingBeijingChina
  2. 2.Beijing Municipal Key Laboratory of New Energy Materials and TechnologiesUniversity of Science and Technology BeijingBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations