Comparison Criteria and Scope

Emission Simulation Benchmark Report

A. Comparison criteria

A comparison group is one curve at a fixed configuration and output channel, or one scalar at a given angle, wavelength or sweep condition. The share uses each group’s maximum relative difference; identical all-zero groups are listed separately. Parts per million express numerical differences without ranking either software’s accuracy. The metric index is in Appendix D.

Relative differences are expressed in parts per million (ppm); 1 ppm = 0.0001%. Pointwise Spectrum and Power Dissipation relative differences use the absolute reference value, with a denominator floor of 10⁻⁸ of the valid reference peak for the case and channel. Mode uses nonzero reference values. All-zero references require exactly zero absolute difference; no relative difference is assigned.

Additional baseline metrics report both relative and absolute differences in their physical units. CIE xy maximum absolute differences are below 10⁻⁷; angular integrals, Blue Index and peak wavelength have relative differences below 1 ppm. FWHM is listed under Different definitions.

Statistics cover the full valid grid. Figures show representative slices and do not replace full-grid statistics. The measured differences do not change with the selection of displayed slices.

Power Dissipation excludes only the exact critical coordinates registered in the original validation, without extending exclusions to neighboring points. Curves break at these coordinates; original values and exclusion flags remain in the data archive. Spectrum and Mode do not use this exclusion.

Results for the Purcell factor, lifetime and quantum efficiency are listed separately. Mode fractions and quantum efficiency are plotted as percentages, and lifetime in ns. Relative and absolute decay rates are dimensionless and in s⁻¹, respectively.

The share is based on 75,467 groups with defined relative differences. FWHM, spectrally weighted Mode and emission-position distributions are assessed separately; 853 identical all-zero groups are excluded from the relative-difference share.

B. Overall results

This report evaluates Dreapex TMM emission simulations for the baseline QLED and the tested structural, emission and parameter-sweep variants. Spectrum, Power Dissipation and Mode contain 3,585,646 valid compared values.

Spectrum total, s and p and all nine noncritical Power Dissipation channels in the incoherent and birefringent groups have very small differences < 1 ppm. Of 18 birefringent Mode configurations, 16 have very small differences < 1 ppm for every metric. Both configurations of the birefringent TFB case (d) have small differences < 0.0026%; individual values are listed in the tables.

Spectrum thickness and two-emitter sweeps have relative differences below 1 ppm. Emission-position Spectrum differences reach 2.788976%; Dreapex TMM is more accurate in the independent mean-position check in Section 2.8. FWHM and spectrally weighted Mode are labeled Different definitions; emission-position distributions are evaluated separately as a spatial-sampling comparison. These three categories are excluded from the headline share, with all measured values retained.

Baseline angular integrals, CIE xy, Blue Index, FWHM and peak wavelengths contribute 900 valid compared values. The full report contains 3,585,646 valid compared values; repeated views of the same data are counted once. CIE xy maximum absolute differences are below 10⁻⁷. Angular integrals, Blue Index and peak wavelength have very small differences < 1 ppm; FWHM uses different definitions.

C. Scope and limitations

• The transparency control has a direct Power Dissipation reference only; Spectrum is outside the measured outputs for that configuration.
• Multiple independent emissive layers, arbitrary Custom orientation, biaxial materials and tilted optical axes are outside this evaluation. Two-emitter cases use one emissive layer. The full weighted Mode comparison is in Section 2.12.
• A layer that is both incoherent and birefringent, and an incoherent or absorbing emitter, are outside the evaluated configurations.
• Results apply to the archived data snapshot and do not constitute comprehensive validation of arbitrary materials, parameter combinations or the currently deployed version.

This is an independent numerical assessment and does not constitute certification or endorsement by the reference software vendor.

D. Emission benchmark metric index

The table lists 35 metrics and their sections, distinguishing direct results, converted reference values and color comparisons using the same spectrum.