{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02418207681365576, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010668563300142247, 'mean_word_length': 5.3954545454545455, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Advancing 2D Perovskites for Efficient and Stable Solar Cells: Challenges and Opportunities

Perovskite solar cells (PSCs) have rapidly emerged as one of the hottest topics in the photovoltaics community owing to their high power‐conversion efficiencies (PCE), and the promise to be produced at low cost. Among various PSCs, typical 3D perovskite‐based solar cells deliver high PCE but they suffer from severe instability, which restricts their practical applications. In contrast to 3D perovskites, 2D perovskites that incorporate larger, less volatile, and generally more hydrophobic organic cations exhibit much improved thermal, chemical, and environmental stability. 2D perovskites can have different roles within a solar cell, either as the primary light absorber (2D PSCs), or as a capping layer atop a 3D perovskite absorbing layer (2D/3D PSCs). Tradeoffs between PCE and stability exist in both types of PSCs—2D PSCs are more stable but exhibit lower efficiency while 2D/3D PSCs deliver exciting efficiency but show relatively poor stability. To address this PCE/stability tradeoff, the challenges both the 2D and 2D/3D PSCs face are identified and select works the community has undertaken to overcome them are highlighted in this review. It is ended with several recommendations on how to further improve PSCs so their performance and stability can be commensurate with application requirements.