Table 1.

Key findings from PSC studies.

Author	PSC structure	Performance	Key findings	References
Hao et al.	MASnI3	PCE of 5.7%	First Successful Fabrication	23
Zhao et al.	MASnI3	Improved PCE to 6.4%	Increasing stability b reducing defects	24
Umari et al.	MASnI3	Superior properties of MASnI3 compared to MAPbI3	Many-body perturbation theory	25
Qi et al.	MASnI3	PCE of 11.12%	Sequential deposition and Oxidation mitigation	27
Mathews et al.	Ge-based	MAGeI3 and CsGeI3 PSCs with PCEs of 0.11% and 0.2% respectively	Proposed Ge as a potential substitute for Pb	30
Kopacic et al.	MAGeI2.7Br0.3	PCE of 0.57%	Chemical composition modification with Br	31
Kanoun et al.	MAGeI3	PCE of 21.6% through numerical modeling	Numerical Modelling	32
Singh et al.	MAGeI3	PCE of 26.3%	Numerical Modelling	33
Raoui et al.	MAPbI3	Improved PCE between 19.7 and 26.74% using different ETLs and HTLs	Material substitution (ETL = SnO2 & ZnO2 and HTLs = CuSbS2, Cu2O & CuSCN)	40
Shasti et al.	MAPbI3	Improved PCE between 19.67 and 19.82% using different HTLs	Replacing spriro-OMeTAD with Cu2O, SrCu2O2 and CuAlO2	41
Khattak et al.	MAPbI3	Multiple cells PCE beyond 20%	Kesterites utilized as HTL	35
Trifiletti et al.	MAPbI3	PCE of 14% using CZTS kesterite in planar structure	CZTS compared in planar and inverted structure	45
Karimi et al.	MAPbI3	Higher PCE of 21.8% with ZnO	SnO2 and ZnO compared as ETL	34
Arzi et al.	MAPBI3	Higher PCE 20.6% with ZnO	TiO2 and ZnO compared as ETL	47
Raoui et al. and Nine et al.	MAPbI3 & MASnI3	MAPbI3 achieved PCE of 19.7% while MASnI3 achieved 9% using SnO2 and CuI as CTL	MAPbI3 formed good band alignment while MASnI3 formed alignment with offsets	48