Skip to content
Frontiers
Search

Original Research

Frontiers in Electronic Materials ·

Volume 6 - 2026 | https://doi.org/10.3389/femat.2026.1919862

Next-generation solar modules: thermoelectric-assisted photovoltaics with a photothermal layer for thermal management

  • V. Parkavi1,2
  • K. Narendra1,3
  • Mohammed Faazil1,3
  • K. Jayabal1,4
  • Pandiyarasan Veluswamy1,3*corresponding author
  1. 1Smart and Innovative Laboratory for Energy Devices, Indian Institute of Information Technology, Design and Manufacturing, Kancheepuram, Chennai, India
  2. 2School of Interdisciplinary Design and Innovation, Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and Manufacturing, Kancheepuram, Chennai, India
  3. 3Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and Manufacturing, Kancheepuram, Chennai, India
  4. 4Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and Manufacturing Kancheepuram, Chennai, India
Article metrics0 viewsView details
PDFCiteMetrics

Abstract

The utilization of solar integrated thermoelectric technology plays a crucial role in addressing the global energy crisis. Enhancing the performance of the integrated technology can be achieved by introducing a photothermal layer. This layer consists of a photothermal material that exhibits broad solar absorption, including the near-infrared (IR) region. Wide-bandgap 2D semiconductor materials were used as the photothermal material. The integration shows better performance than other conventional techniques. This work includes an evaluation using COMSOL, a computational technique. Simulation models were developed and used to predict performance under various solar irradiance conditions. Results were predicted for electrical parameters and found to be 6.2 V produced by an individual module, whereas when the photothermal layer is introduced between the integrated technology, the device can produce a voltage of approximately 9 V. These findings include the comparison study of different photothermal materials. Thus, the proposed work involves predicting and optimizing the behavior of the integrated device in various environmental conditions and provides a way to maximize its energy conversion efficiency.

Keywords

1 Introduction

Renewable energy technologies play a vital role in addressing global energy demand. The most abundant source of energy is the Sun, which delivers a power of approximately 1.2 × 105 TW. Solar energy is preferred because it emits no greenhouse gases (Ellabban et al., 2014; Panwar et al., 2011; Qazi et al., 2019; Youm et al., 2000). Photovoltaics (PV) can absorb visible light that matches the energy bandgap of PV material silicon and UV light, whereas infrared (IR) radiation is converted to heat that reduces the efficiency and life span of the PV. The efficiency drop in PV is approximately 0.4%–0.6% (Xi et al., 2007; Blakers, 2019; Marta et al., 2021).

Research has been conducted on cooling mechanisms in PV to reduce their heat. Both active and passive cooling techniques are involved to boost their performance (Lashin et al., 2019; Ramkiran et al., 2021). The photoelectric conversion efficiency of the PV module was improved due to both air convection and water circulation methods. In water circulation methods, the performance is analyzed for different techniques such as back water cooling and thin film cooling mechanisms (Abdelrahman et al., 2013). However, these techniques involve utilization of external power. Thus, a passive technique is preferred, as no external energy is required (Wu and Xiong, 2014).

Thermoelectric generators (TEGs) are suggested mainly because of their dual role. They can act as a passive cooling technique, and they can generate power. They absorb heat and convert it into electrical power based on the Seebeck principle (Jaziri et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2020). The effectiveness of the integrated device depends on several factors such as the TE material, their placement, and thermal resistance. To maximize solar energy absorption and reduce thermal resistance, photothermal materials play a dominant role. They can transform incident light into heat and are preferred in various research fields. Among the different categories of photothermal materials, metal oxides are highlighted as photothermal agents in recent years for energy harvesting applications. Materials such as TiO2, ZnO, and SnO2 are used as photothermal materials. TiO2 stands out as a well-known material, and due to ease of synthesis and stability, it is considered for energy applications. However, it can only absorb UV light. It has a bandgap of 3.2 eV. Similarly, ZnO material, which is also a wide bandgap material used for photothermal applications, possesses excellent photothermal conversion efficiency and thermal cycling (Fu et al., 2026). However, it can only absorb UV and must be modified to extend the absorption to the visible and near-infrared regions.

Hence, tuning the material, including doping, defect engineering, or morphological tuning, is required to decrease the bandgap (Agrawal et al., 2021). Black TiO2 is obtained from TiO2 due to oxygen vacancies, creating Ti3+ ions, which significantly enhances visible light absorption. Compared to TiO2, black TiO2 or reduced TiO2 shows superior performance in photothermal applications, which is mainly due to structural and electronic enhancements (Rajaraman et al., 2020). The design has been tested and developed through experimental studies. Simulation techniques act as a strong metaphor for experimental methods (Ma et al., 2014). Researchers have been working on simulation and computational methods to compare and validate their materials and their properties for various applications that have been validated experimentally. Table 1 shows various works comparing both simulation results and experimental methods.

TABLE 1. Studies in experimental and simulated research.

S. noName of the article and authorCommentsReferences
1Experimental assessment of thermoelectric generator package properties: Simulated results validation and real gradient capabilitiesLuca Francioso et al.Thermal gradient values were measured both experimentally and by simulation in a thermoelectric generator. When the elastomer thickness is approximately 2 mm, the thermal analysis is analyzed experimentally and by simulation, and ΔT is found to be 3.20 +_0.19 and 2.52, with a difference of approximately ∼0.6Francioso et al. (2015)
2Comparison of experimental, analytical and simulation results for hot rolling of S275JR quality steelGazi Kurt et al.HEA 240 profile in S275JR quality is made in 21 passes, whereas the geometric dimensions are compared with 3D Finite element analysis. The results are found to have a similar ratio of 95%–99%, and the results are close, with less than 5% deviationKurt and Yas (2020)
3Numerical modelling of Thermoelectric generators with varying material properties in a circuit simulatorMin Chen et al.A comparison between simulated and experimental results for TEC 1–12706 under specified conditions. Although there are some differences between the outputs, the error value is within an acceptable rangeChen et al. (2009)
4Harvesting vibration energy using piezoelectric material: Modelling, Simulation and experimental validationsM. N. FakhzanAn analytical estimation of voltage production of a piezoelectric cantilever with and without attached proof masses was done. The peak differences between experimental and simulation results are 0.93% and 5.85%Fakhzan and Muthalif (2013)
5Multiphysics simulation of Thermoelectric systems for comparison with experimental device performanceDirk EblingThe figure of merit for a thermoelectric device was analyzed. Comparing the experimental data with simulation results in an electrical contact resistance with an average value of approximately (3.7 ± 0.12) × 10−4 Ω/cm2Ebling et al. (2009)
6Analysis of Thermoelectric Generator Performance by use of Simulations and ExperimentsOlle HogblomContact resistance in thermoelectric generators was determined by both nonlinear systems and simulations in which electrical parameters such as voltage, current, and power were measured. The predicted results have errors within acceptable rangeAndersson (2014)

The traditional experimental studies involved in achieving these results are time consuming and labor intensive.

Thus, the proposed work consists of developing a simulation model to predict and optimize suitable photothermal materials for energy harvesting applications. The simulation model was analyzed for various PV modules and their integrated modules. This study used the COMSOL Multiphysics simulation tool for developing a PV-TEG integrated device (Ali and Rafat, 2017). Different metal oxide materials, including TiO2, ZnO, and black TiO2, were analyzed for use as photothermal materials in a PV-TEG integrated device. This is the continuation of the previous approach of the experimental study. The performance of the PV module was analyzed with and without a photothermal layer.

2 Modeling and simulation

2.1 Methodology

The proposed PV–Photothermal layer–TEG system configuration and equivalent circuit are shown in Figures 1A,B. It consists of a PV module, a photothermal layer, a TEG, and a heat sink. The PV module absorbs the UV and visible radiation from the sun. The photothermal layer includes metal oxides such as black TiO2 coated on cellulose fabric. They are able to absorb the near-IR region from the solar radiation. TEG was used to absorb the heat from the fabric and increase the temperature gradient, improving the overall efficiency of the PV system. Finally, a heat sink is attached to the bottom of the TEG for heat dissipation. The 3D model was constructed in COMSOL Multiphysics using the Heat Transfer in Solids and Electric Currents modules. The PV layer, composed of two sublayers (solar cell and glass), converts solar radiation into electrical energy and produces heat. This excess heat was transferred to the photothermal layer, which absorbs more solar radiation and increases the temperature at the hot side of the TEG. The TEG transforms the temperature differential between its cold and hot sides into electric power due to the Seebeck effect, and the heat sink on its bottom removes heat by convection to ensure a steady thermal gradient.

Schematic representation of teh proposed work **(A)** Integrated device **(B)** Equivalent circuit of the device.
Figure 1. Schematic representation of teh proposed work (A) Integrated device (B) Equivalent circuit of the device.

Thin thermal interface materials (TIMs) were deposited between layers to enhance thermal contact and reduce losses. Material properties such as thermal conductivity, Seebeck coefficient, and electrical resistivity were assigned to every domain in COMSOL. The boundary conditions were the solar heat flux on the PV surface, convective cooling on the heat sink, and electrical terminals on the TEG for voltage and current measurement. The model is solved under steady-state or transient conditions for temperature and potential distributions. The temperature gradient (ΔT) across the TEG was measured by assessing average temperatures at both the hot and cold ceramic surfaces through surface averages. Terminal voltage (V) was computed from the difference in potential between the positive and negative terminals, and current (I) was obtained from the integral of total current density across one terminal. The power output (P) is then found from P = V × I. The efficiency of the TEG (η) can be calculated as η = P/Qin, where Qin is the total input heat flux into the TEG’s hot side, as available from the heat flux variable. Finally, temperature difference vs. terminal voltage, current, and power can be graphed with a 1D plot group where a global/point graph allows performance analysis and optimization of layer thickness, material choice, and system efficiency. They were modeled as a current source in parallel with a diode with series resistance that accounts for internal losses. The current was generated based on incident solar radiation. In contrast, the TEG was represented as a voltage source with internal resistance (R_{TEG}). The output terminals of the PV and TEG were connected in series. Thus, the total voltage is the sum of the PV and TEG voltages:and the current through the circuit is common to both devices:

V T o t a l = V P V + V T E G

I T o t a l = I P V + I T E G

The series configuration ensures that both devices contribute to the same load, improving system efficiency.

2.2 Mechanism of the integrated device

Figure 2 represents the mechanism involved in the integrated device where the top-most layer is the photovoltaic panel that absorbs photons with energies equal to or greater than the bandgap. These photons excite electron–hole pairs and generate electric current. The photons below the bandgap and the unused photons pass to the photothermal layer as heat. The principle that lies behind them is the photovoltaic effect.

Mechanism of the PV-TEG integrated device.
Figure 2. Mechanism of the PV-TEG integrated device.

The next layer is the photothermal layer, which consists of 2D materials. These materials possess tunable bandgaps that allow them to absorb long-wavelength IR radiation. Due to the mechanism of non-radiative relaxation, the semiconductor materials are able to fine-tune their bandgap and can absorb a wide range of the solar spectrum.

The photothermal layer traps this thermal energy, passes it to the top surface of TEG, and acts as the hot side. The bottom side of TEG has a heat sink that dissipates the heat. Hence, a temperature gradient ΔT is maintained. The principle that lies behind them is the Seebeck effect, which generates voltage based on temperature difference.

Thus, the individual device is able to generate power, and when the devices are integrated, the sum of their power enhances the overall power generation.

The voltage produced from the device is the combination of both VPV and VTEG and is

P P V + T E G = V P V + T E G * I P V + T E G .

2.3 Geometry design

The PV part consists of two layers, a top glass cover and an active solar cell layer. The glass layer (approximately 2–3 mm) shields the cell and lets sunlight through, and the solar cell layer (100–300 µm) generates electricity and heat from light. Both were simulated as flat rectangular solids of equal footprint, usually approximately 50 mm × 50 mm. These two layers are stacked directly and act as the main solar energy input surface for the system. The photothermal layer was positioned under the PV cell to capture the available light and transfer it as heat. It was simulated as a thin slab or film, typically 0.01–1 mm thick, and covering the same area as the PV cell. The layer facilitates greater heat transfer to the TEG and overall energy efficiency. In COMSOL, it can be used as a solid or a boundary heat absorption surface.

The photothermal layer was modeled as a thin layer with a thickness of 0.01–1 mm. The surface area of the thermal layer is considered the same as the PV panel. In the COMSOL environment, the layer was represented as a solid form that is designed for thermal absorption. Beneath the thermal layer, TEG is developed. It consists of both n- and p-type semiconductor material between two ceramic plates. Each semiconductor leg typically measures between 1 mm and 5 mm in height and 2 mm and 5 mm in width, contributing to an overall TEG thickness of approximately 6–10 mm. The heat sink, positioned at the base of the device, serves to dissipate heat from the cold side of the thermoelectric generator. These fins typically range from 10 mm to 50 mm in height and are spaced 2–20 mm apart. The enhanced air circulation improves cooling efficiency. Figures 3A–E shows the simulation model developed for the integrated device with and without a photothermal layer.

Simulation model of the integrated device: **(A)** standalone PV, **(B)** PV integrated with passive cooling technique TEG and a heat sink for dissipation, **(C)** PV integrated with TEG and heat sink along with TiO<sub>2</sub> as the photothermal layer, **(D)** PV integrated with TEG and a heat sink along with black TiO<sub>2</sub> as the photothermal layer, and **(E)** PV integrated with TEG and a heat sink along with ZnO as the photothermal layer.
Figure 3. Simulation model of the integrated device: (A) standalone PV, (B) PV integrated with passive cooling technique TEG and a heat sink for dissipation, (C) PV integrated with TEG and heat sink along with TiO2 as the photothermal layer, (D) PV integrated with TEG and a heat sink along with black TiO2 as the photothermal layer, and (E) PV integrated with TEG and a heat sink along with ZnO as the photothermal layer.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Performance of the device based on solar radiation

The performance of the integrated device was analyzed as shown in Figure 4. Based on solar radiation, the performance of PV modules with and without a photothermal layer was analyzed in terms of voltage, current, power, and efficiency, as shown in Figures 4A–D. Solar radiation values varied from 200 W to 1000 W. When compared to all modules, such as PV and PV with TEG and TiO2 or ZnO as photothermal materials, PV integrted with TEG and black TiO2 as photothermal layer shows an enhanced performance. TiO2 is a direct bandgap material. It is tuned to an indirect bandgap through a chemical reduction technique, and the bandgap is reduced in black TiO2. The voltage of this integrated device is approximately 9 V, and the efficiency is approximately 6.8%. This PV module is involved in absorbing a wide range of the solar spectrum.

Performance of the device in terms of **(A)** voltage, **(B)** current, **(C)** power, and **(D)** efficiency.
Figure 4. Performance of the device in terms of (A) voltage, (B) current, (C) power, and (D) efficiency.

3.2 Performance of the device based on wind velocity

The performance of the integrated device based on wind velocity was analyzed as shown in Figure 5. Wind velocity is one of the parameters on which PV is evaluated. Wind enhances convective heat transfer from the panel surface. Based on wind velocity, the performance of PV modules with and without a photothermal layer was analyzed in terms of voltage, current, power, and efficiency, as shown in Figures 5A–D. As the interface used in this work is heat transfer in solids, the influence of wind velocity was incorporated by convective heat flux. Thus, the effect of wind was represented by varying the convective cooling conditions with wind velocity from 2 m/s to 10 m/s, and no fluid calculations were performed. When compared to all modules such as PV and PV with TEG and TiO2 or ZnO as photothermal material, PV integrted with TEG and black TiO2 as photothermal layer shows an enhanced performance.

Performance of the device based on wind velocity in terms of **(A)** voltage, **(B)** current, **(C)** power, and **(D)** efficiency.
Figure 5. Performance of the device based on wind velocity in terms of (A) voltage, (B) current, (C) power, and (D) efficiency.

4 Conclusion

The proposed work consists of integrating hybrid energy harvesters using a simulation model to analyze performance. COMSOL Multiphysics was used for the simulation model. The results reveal that the performance of the integrated device with a photothermal layer shows enhanced performance compared with other modules. An efficiency of approximately 6.8% was predicted for the integrated device with black TiO2 as the photothermal layer. These results highlight the role of using a photothermal layer in the integrated device for improving energy conversion efficiency. As predicted in Table 1, the proposed simulation model can be compared with the experimental results in terms of electrical parameters such as voltage, current, and power, which were analyzed experimentally using a device in which black TiO2 acts as the photothermal layer and produces a voltage of approximately 4.6 V (Parkavi et al., 2025). The difference between the outputs in terms of the error value is within an acceptable range.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Footnotes

Edited by: Matteo Massetti, Imperial College, United Kingdom

Reviewed by: Mengyao Lyu, University of Cincinnati, United States

Della Thomas, Indian Institute of Information Technology, Kottayam, India

Statements

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. The work is supported by the Innovation in Science Pursuit for Inspire Research through the Department of Science and Technology (DST) funded by the Ministry of Science and Technology by DST/INSPIRE/04/2017/002629, IIITDM/SMIRE/2024/003, and the Science and Engineering Research Board core research grant by CRG/2021/006188.

Data availability

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Author contributions

VP: Writing – original draft. KN: Formal analysis, Writing – original draft. MF: Validation, Writing – original draft. KJ: Visualization, Writing – review and editing. PV: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Writing – review and editing.

References

  1. Abdelrahman M., Eliwa A., Abdellatif O. E. (2013). “ Experimental investigation of different cooling methods for photovoltaic module,” in 11th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference.
  2. Agrawal A., Siddiqui S. A., Soni A., Khandelwal K., Sharma G. D. (2021). Performance analysis of TiO 2 based dye sensitized solar cell prepared by screen printing and doctor blade deposition techniques. Sol. Energy 226, 9 – 19. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2021.08.001
  3. Ali N. M., Rafat N. H. (2017). Modeling and simulation of nanorods photovoltaic solar cells_ A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 68, 212 – 220. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.114
  4. Andersson R. (2014). Analysis of thermoelectric generator performance by use of simulations and experiments. 43 (6): 2247 – 2254.
  5. Blakers A. (2019). Development of the PERC solar cell. IEEE J. Photovoltaics 9 (3), 629 – 635. doi:10.1109/jphotov.2019.2899460
  6. Chen M., Member S., Rosendahl L. A., Condra T. J., Pedersen J. K., Member S. (2009). Numerical modeling of thermoelectric generators with varing material properties in a circuit simulator. 24 (1): 112 – 124.
  7. Ebling D., Jaegle M., Bartel M., Jacquot A., Bo H. (2009). Multiphysics simulation of thermoelectric systems for comparison with experimental device performance. J. Electron. Mater. 38 (7), 1456 – 1461. doi:10.1007/s11664-009-0825-0
  8. Ellabban O., Abu-rub H., Blaabjerg F. (2014). Renewable energy resources: current status, future prospects and their enabling technology. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 39, 748 – 764. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.113
  9. Fakhzan M. N., Muthalif A. G. A. (2013). Mechatronics harvesting vibration energy using piezoelectric material: modeling, simulation and experimental verifications q. Mechatronics 23 (1), 61 – 66. doi:10.1016/j.mechatronics.2012.10.009
  10. Francioso L., Pascali C. De, Siciliano P. (2015). Experimental assessment of thermoelectric generator package properties: simulated results validation and real gradient capabilities. Energy 86, 300 – 310. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2015.04.041
  11. Fu M., Luo S., Cheng M., Li Y., Huang Y., Cheng X. (2026). Materials and design ZnO/PPy modified carbon foam supported phase change material with efficient photothermal conversion and light-driven shape memory. Mater. and Des. 265, 116022. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2026.116022
  12. Jaziri N., Boughamoura A., Müller J., Mezghani B., Tounsi F., Ismail M. (2020). A comprehensive review of thermoelectric generators: technologies and common applications. Energy Rep. 6, 264 – 287. doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2019.12.011
  13. Kurt G., Yas N. (2020). Comparison of experimental, analytical and simulation results for hot rolling of S275JR quality steel. 9 (3): 5204 – 5215.
  14. Lashin A., Turkestani M. Al, Sabry M. (2019). Concentrated photovoltaic/thermal hybrid system coupled with a thermoelectric generator. Energies 12 (13), 1 – 12. doi:10.3390/en12132623
  15. Marta V., Nancy H., Ian Marius P., Ron S., Arnulf J.-W., Carlos del C. (2021). Solar photovoltaics is ready to power a sustainable future. JOULE 5 (5), 1041 – 1056. Available online at:.
  16. Ma T., Yang H., Lu L. (2014). Solar photovoltaic system modeling and performance prediction. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 36, 304 – 315. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.057
  17. Panwar N. L., Kaushik S. C., Kothari S. (2011). Role of renewable energy sources in environmental protection: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (3), 1513 – 1524. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2010.11.037
  18. Parkavi V., K J., Veluswamy P. (2025). Harnessing solar energy: black TiO2 nanoparticles for superior photothermal and power generation. Colloids Surfaces A Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 710, 136297. doi:10.1016/j.colsurfa.2025.136297
  19. Qazi A., Hussain F., Rahim NABD, Member S., Alghazzawi D., Shaban K. (2019). Towards sustainable energy: a systematic review of renewable energy sources, technologies, and public opinions. IEEE Access 7, 63837 – 63851. doi:10.1109/access.2019.2906402
  20. Rajaraman T. S., Parikh S. P., Gandhi V. G. (2020). Black TiO2: a review of its properties and conflicting trends. Chem. Eng. J. 389, 123918. doi:10.1016/j.cej.2019.123918
  21. Ramkiran B, Sundarabalan CK, Sudhakar K (2021). Sustainable passive cooling strategy for PV module: a comparative analysis. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 27 (July), 101317. doi:10.1016/j.csite.2021.101317
  22. Wu S., Xiong C. (2014). Passive cooling technology for photovoltaic panels for domestic houses. Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol. 9 (2), 118 – 126. doi:10.1093/ijlct/ctu013
  23. Xi H., Luo L., Fraisse G. (2007). Development and applications of solar-based thermoelectric technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 11 (5), 923 – 936. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2005.06.008
  24. Youm I., Sarr J., Sall M., Kane M. M. (2000). Renewable energy activities in Senegal: a review. Renew. and Sustainable Energy Reviews 4 (1), 75 – 89. doi:10.1016/S1364-0321(99)00009-X
  25. Zhang J., Zhai H., Wu Z., Wang Y., Xie H., Zhang M. (2020). Enhanced performance of photovoltaic–thermoelectric coupling devices with thermal interface materials. Energy Rep. 6, 116 – 122. doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2019.12.001

Citation

Parkavi, V., et al. (2026). Next-generation solar modules: thermoelectric-assisted photovoltaics with a photothermal layer for thermal management. Frontiers in Electronic Materials, Volume 6. https://doi.org/
Received
Accepted
Published
Volume
6 - 2026

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Parkavi, Narendra, Faazil, Jayabal and Veluswamy.

License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

*Correspondence: Pandiyarasan Veluswamy

Article metrics

Views
0
Downloads
0
Citations
0
Shares
0

Related articles

ReviewThermally activated delayed fluorescent conducting organic polymers for OLED applicationKavinkumar Ravikumar, Rutika Bundela Yogesh, Rajadurai Arasi, Jayasri Rangasamy, Udhayakeerthana Manimaran, Milind Shrinivas DangateSpecialty Grand ChallengeToward the ultimate superconductivity solverAlexei FedorovReviewAdvancements in thin film thermoelectric: progress and perspective on materials and devicesNurfarhana Ahmad Musri, Angella Th’ng, Izzah Hanim Abd Aziz, Ubaidah Syafiq