ArticleScientific reports2026
Stacking ensemble machine learning for predicting photodetector performance under varying illumination intensities.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Comparative assessment of machine learning models for polymer solution viscosity prediction in enhanced oil recovery.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Photodetectors are essential components in modern optoelectronic technologies, yet experimental characterization of nanomaterial-based devices is often time-consuming and resource-intensive. To address this challenge, this study presents a stacking ensemble learning approach to predict the performance of bismuth-doped graphene quantum dots-based photodetectors under illumination levels ranging from 22 to 110 mW/mm². Four boosting algorithms—Adaptive Boosting, Gradient Boosting, Extreme Gradient Boosting, and Categorical Boosting—were trained on datasets obtained under dark, 22, 66, and 110 mW/mm², while 44 and 88 mW/mm² data were reserved for testing. A stacking ensemble learning model further enhanced prediction accuracy. The final model achieved a coefficient of determination of 0.9874 and a mean absolute error of 0.1840 at 88 mW/mm², effectively predicting the logarithmic current–voltage characteristics. The model also estimated key photodetector metrics, including sensitivity (1589.27), responsivity (2.389 mA/W), and specific detectivity (1.16 × 10¹⁰ Jones). This study explores the use of a stacking ensemble of four boosting algorithms to model the performance of Bi-GQD/p-Si photodetectors across different illumination levels, offering a data-driven alternative to traditional characterization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.