Comparison on Module Performance and Degradation Robustness of Two‐, Three‐, and Four‐Terminal Perovskite Silicon Configurations Under Realistic Operating Conditions

ABSTRACT Perovskite/silicon (PS) technology includes three main configurations: two‐terminal (2T), three‐terminal (3T), and four‐terminal (4T). Previous studies have made various comparisons between these configurations, significantly advancing our understanding of these devices. While these studies mostly focus on simulations on cell level, we perform bandgap energy ( ) optimization at the module level for different configurations under outdoor conditions. Using opto‐electrical simulations, we predict the energy yield of each module at four geographical locations, with varying values of . The optimal for the 2T, 3T, and 4T modules are 1.62, 1.80, and 1.82 eV, respectively. We also perform a loss analysis to explore the differences in power losses among the configurations. These loss differences can be attributed to the configurations having different optimal values (affecting the thermalization losses) or different module designs (affecting the interconnection losses). Among all losses, mismatch losses play the most critical role in optimizing the bandgap. Overall, all optimized configurations have similar energy yields (all differences within 1.5%) across all locations. Finally, we compare the robustness of the different configurations against different scenarios of perovskite degradation. Our results show that the 4T module is the least sensitive to degradation in the perovskite subcell.