Electron Regulation in Pt-M (M = Cu, Co, and Ni) Decorated WO3 Thin Films for Photocatalytic Degradation Performance
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript catalysts-2419486, entitled “Electron regulation in Pt-M (M = Cu, Co, and Ni) decorated WO3 thin films for photocatalytic degradation performance” by Pan et al., deals with an important topic of research nowadays. However, several problems should be addressed before this paper can be considered to be accepted.
1 - The English writing should be improved. There are some typographical and grammatical errors in the manuscript. Hence, the manuscript should be carefully checked, and necessary corrections should be done.
2 – Some important information/state-of-art is missing. For example: Line 40 – “Due to its smaller band gap than the popular TiO2, which enables it to absorb more solar energy and produce a larger photocurrent, WO3 has recently attracted attention [8]”. The value of the band gap of the WO3 should be referred.
3 - Why did the author choose the metals Cu, Co and Ni? This choice must be substantiated.
4 – SEM images with higher ampliation have to be done.
5- SEM images of the cross section of the films are missing, to see the thickness of the films (layers of ITO and semiconductor materials).
6 - The authors must follow the guideline of the journal, for example the acronyms, abbreviations and initialisms, should be defined in the first time they appear in each of three sections. For example, “LSV” appears in the line 233 (section 2.6) and the definition only in the line 401 (section 3.4). The same for “ITO”, “PMMA”, and more, please check all the manuscript.
7 - In section 2.5, what about adsorption prior to the irradiation, how were the results? These results have to be presented.
8 - MB is a very studied dye, so the authors should compare their results with others already published for MB and WO3.
9 - The determination of the energy of the valence band and the conduction band must be done.
The English writing should be improved. There are some typographical and grammatical errors in the manuscript.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This article reports on the, Electron regulation in Pt-M (M = Cu, Co, and Ni) decorated WO3 thin films for photocatalytic degradation performance The results demonstrated that when compared to the WO3 thin film, the photocatalytic capability for methylene blue (MB) solution degradation was greatly increased in the Pt-Cu/WO3, Pt-Co/WO3, and Pt-Ni/WO3 thin films. Transfer routes for photogenerated charges and an improved photocatalytic process were suggested based on experimental results. Following revisions should be made before publications:
1. There are some type or format errors in the manuscript, especially in the reference section. The author is requested to carefully check and revise.
2. There are several articles based on WO3 has already been reported. Why is this work necessary?
3. Authors used expensive Pt catalyst. How about cost effectiveness?
4. The abstract should be revised highlighting the center objective and findings.
5. In introduction section the rational use of metal oxides can be explained more with the reference of following articles:
doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2022.139884, doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2021.129312,
6. Photocatalytic dye degradation and Kinetics study is not sufficient. Kinetic models should be better explained. What is the mechanism of degradation?
7. Peak position in XPS spectra should be indexed. HR-TEM image is necessary for microstructure study.
8. How about the EIS circuit diagram? Refer: doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2023.106713
9. This article requires deep literature review. Some more figures should be presented.
1. There are some type or format errors in the manuscript, especially in the reference section. The author is requested to carefully check and revise.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
All comments have been mostly addressed and fulfilled, improving this manuscript. Therefore, the manuscript can be accepted for publication in Catalysts.
Only a small improvement in writing is needed, to standardize, for example "Bang gap" sometimes appears "Bandgap" other times "Band gap". Please read the entire manuscript carefully.
Reviewer 2 Report
Accept.
