T. J. Wijaya, S. Xiong, K. Sasaki, et al.: A Highly Stable Organic–Inorganic Hybrid Electron Transport Layer for Ultraflexible Organic Photodiodes. Adv. Mater. 37, 2501951 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202501951
When the production files for the article were submitted, figures pertaining to detectivity data that belonged to an earlier version of the manuscript were uploaded by mistake, instead of the versions in the revised manuscript itself, which was then accepted. It was also overlooked both during proof preparation and during proofing that the earlier incorrect versions of Figures 2, 3, and 4 had been provided and used.
Another error in Figure 4 was identified during proofing—namely, the x‐axis label of Figure 4d,e. As a result, the figure was replaced prior to publication, and the published version of Figure 4 is correct. However, although the corrected Figure 4 was submitted and reviewed, the corresponding update to the main text description in Paragraph 3 of Section 2.3 was inadvertently overlooked during the review and proofing process. Consequently, the values mentioned in the text do not align with those shown in the corrected figure.
Figures C2 and C3 (C for corrected) are hereby corrected as shown below. Paragraph 3 in Section 2.3 is also corrected as follows (the corrected values are indicated in bold).
Figure C2:
Figure C2. a) Dark current characteristics of the OPDs before and after light irradiation. This test exposed the devices to light with wavelengths of 1000–300 nm. b) Average dark current density at −2 V before and after light irradiation. The error bar shows the standard deviation of six devices. c) Shot‐noise‐limited specific detectivity (D * shot) of the OPD at 550 nm with an applied bias of −2 V before and after light irradiation. The error bar shows the standard deviation of six devices.
Figure C3:
Figure C3. a) J–V characteristics of an OPD with PEI‐Zn NP ETL before and after the air stability test. The test exposed the devices to air at a controlled temperature and humidity under dark conditions. b) Normalized photocurrent density (J ph) and dark current density (J d) of the OPDs to their respective initial values after a period of storage in air. c) Shot‐noise‐limited specific detectivity (D * shot) of the OPDs at 550 nm with an applied bias of −2 V during the air stability test. The error bar shows the standard deviation of four devices. d) J–V characteristics of an OPD with PEI‐Zn NP ETL before and after the thermal stability test. This test heated the devices at 100 °C in dark and glove‐box environments. e) Normalized photocurrent density (J ph) and dark current density (J d) of the OPDs, their respective initial values after a period of heating. f) Shot‐noise‐limited specific detectivity (D * shot) of the OPDs at 550 nm with an applied bias of −2 V during the heating test. The error bar shows the standard deviation of six devices
Corrected Paragraph:
In terms of detectivity, the flexible PEI‐Zn NP OPD initially exhibited a D * shot of 4.2 × 1012 Jones. This lower value than that of the OPD fabricated on the glass substrate was most likely due to the surface roughness of the ultrathin OPD. After 5000 cycles of the mechanical flexibility test, the D * shot was 6.1 × 1012 Jones. In terms of stability, the shot‐noise‐limited specific detectivity values fluctuated by less than 1.7 times and sufficiently exhibited a high value. The test showed that the OPD with the PEI‐Zn NP ETL exhibited stability with respect to mechanical flexing. The use of a single‐layer ETL is beneficial because it simplifies the fabrication process, reduces thermal exposure on the flexible substrate, and supports the mechanical flexibility of the OPD.
We apologize for this error.