Due to a typing mistake, the pixel dwell time during the laser confocal photoluminescence (PL) and photocurrent mapping is not correct. The correct value is 64 μs and not 46 μs. Moreover, due to an error in the laser power calibration curve, evidenced only in recent measurements, the excitation power used during the mapping measurement was 16 μW and not 4.3 μW. For this reason, the reported values of the External Quantum Efficiency (EQE) are over estimated of 3.72 times. The correct average EQE of the map in Figure 2 is then 0.094% and not 0.35%. The figures with the correct EQE scale are reported in the following Figures 2 and 4.
PL and EQE maps of the rrP3HT:F8BT blend for a sample region of 600 μm × 600 μm. (a) F8BT PL map, (b) rrP3HT PL map, (c) EQE map (average EQE 0.094% for exciting wavelength of 488 nm) (optical resolution is 1.24 μm/px).
PL and EQE maps of the rrP3HT:F8BT blend for a sample region of 600 μm × 600 μm. (a) F8BT PL map, (b) rrP3HT PL map, (c) EQE map (average EQE 0.094% for exciting wavelength of 488 nm) (optical resolution is 1.24 μm/px).
PL and EQE maps of the rrP3HT:F8BT blend for a sample region of 80 μm × 80 μm. (a) F8BT PL map, (b) rrP3HT PL map, (c) EQE map (optical resolution is 0.18 μm/px).
PL and EQE maps of the rrP3HT:F8BT blend for a sample region of 80 μm × 80 μm. (a) F8BT PL map, (b) rrP3HT PL map, (c) EQE map (optical resolution is 0.18 μm/px).
The conclusions of the paper1 are not affected by these two errors.
Figures:
