Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(10)
The optical and electrochemical band gap was found to be 2.21 eV.
Optical band gap was found to increase from 3.23 to 3.47 eV and photoluminescence studies revealed that visible PL emission was enhanced with doping concentration.
The band gap was found to increase from 1.15 to 1.74 eV with the Ga-grading along the depth of individual CIS, CIGS, and CGS thin films.
The UV visible absorption spectra indicates as prepared materials has intense absorption in UV region and its corresponding optical band gap was found to be in the range 1.95 to 2.45 eV.
In contrast, the optical band gap was found to be relatively low (0.7eV), closer to the optical band gap of graphite than to that of medium-sized polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (>2eV) which are widely considered to be soot precursors and are mostly contained in the organic carbon.
The optical absorbance spectra showed no sharp absorption edge and the optical band gap was found to be 3.23 eV.
Similar(50)
The estimated band gap is found to decrease with higher nickel doping.
No significant modification of the band gap is found in any case.
The band gap is found to vary from 2.7 to 3.7 eV which decreases with increasing Sr doping level.
The value obtained of the band gap is found to be 1.88 eV, which agrees well with a previously calculated value using first-principles calculations95.
CuInSe2 films are found to have a direct allowed transition and the optical band gap is found to be in the range 0.85 1.05 eV.
More suggestions(17)
band gap was decreased
band gap was engineered
band conduction was found
band gap was simulated
band gap was calculated
band splitting was found
band gap was taken
band gap was estimated
band gap was evaluated
band propagation was found
band density was found
band gap was reported
band intensity was found
band gap was obtained
band gap was detected
band size was found
band pattern was found
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com