MIS-CELIV vs FPV - which one is better for measuring electron and hole mobilities

I have recently invented two novel techniques, namely MIS-CELIV and Flash PhotoVoltage (FPV) allowing to measure both, electron and hole mobilities in semiconducting materials and devices such as solar cells, light emitting diodes etc.

And I started getting questions about which technique is better for specific cases and why. So here comes the explanation in my favourite triple-C (Clear, Concise and Conclusive) fashion.





Pros of MIS-CELIV:
- Unambiguously identifies electron transport from hole.

Cons of MIS-CELIV
- It might be difficult to ensure injecting contact. For instance it is not easy to inject holes into fullerene. This problem is overcome with our latest idea to use light to inject carriers.
- Perfect dielectric layer is required, which makes studied devices "non-operational".
- Presently, it is not applicable if these is significant trapping. Further research is necessary to clarify this.



Pros on FPV:
- Direct technique allowing to observe transit times and calculate mobility.
- Dispersive transport (defined as the distribution of charge carrier mobility values) is directly quantified form transients.
- Non-susceptible to trapping, can even quantify it.

Cons of FPV:
- Transport in non-homogeneous films (for instance in presence of nano-crystals or non-amorphous film morphology) is ambiguous, requires additional experiments.
- Can NOT identify which type of carriers is faster, which is slower, requires additional experiments.
- If the carrier transit times match, it is impossible to know whether they actually do match or they are heavily imbalanced. Additional experiments are required.

So, in general, use MIS-CELIV to measure electron and hole mobilities in unknown materials, while use FPV to study operational devices (organic solar cells for instance).