Depth-Resolved Elemental Analysis by Glow Discharge Emission Spectroscopy: Practical Aspects—A Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper provides a well-summarized description of glow discharge emission spectroscopy. The paper is somehow a desciptive review and how to work with this technique.
In the field of analytics, it has value for the reader. The focus is here mainly on glow discharge emission spectroscopy. Here a table can help to compare to other analytic techniques.
The contribution begins with a very brief introduction to the method. There would be room here to briefly mention and differentiate related techniques such as ToF-SIMS, Auger Spectrometry, or XPS, possibly in a small table.
Chapter 2 presents a nice explanation of the principle behind the Grimm-type discharge source. This is followed by a discussion of the GDOES spectra. For the user, the sections on calibration and error analysis are likely of particular interest.
A brief discussion of the method, especially in comparison to competing techniques, would certainly be helpful to the reader, offering a broader perspective. The summary and final remarks are well written.
Linguistically, the paper is very well done, and the structure is appropriate. The figures are also very good. The only suggestion is to revise or expand the introduction and discussion sections.
The methodology of the paper is fine. The Summary is consistent with the paper content. The references are appropriate. I suggest to add a comparison to other analytics for spectrometry. Most value would be to add here also a comprehensive table.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript reviewed depth-resolved elemental analysis by glow discharge emission spectroscopy. It is well-structured and includes representative application examples. This manuscript could be accepted after minor revisions.
- In the introduction parts, author discusses the developmental trajectory of GDOES, it lacks comprehensive coverage of recent advances over the past five years, particularly in emerging applications such as energy materials and nanoscale coating characterization. Author should discuss seminal studies which exemplify the application of GDOES in these cutting-edge domains.
- In Chapter 4, the author discusses the necessity of incorporating sputtering rate (sputtering factor) into calibration models; however, the manuscript does not sufficiently articulate the underlying assumptions and boundary conditions governing the model’s applicability, such as the stability of discharge parameters and matrix effect constraints. Please discuss more in this part.
- In Chapter 5, the comparative analysis of boron-doped diamond depth profiling via GDOES and SIMS is presented. However, the manuscript omits a quantitative evaluation of the discrepancies between these techniques, including percentage differences in concentration values and comparative depth resolution metrics. Author should add detailed tabulation of key concentration metrics (e.g., peak concentrations, interface transition widths) and provide a critical discussion on the sources of variance, potentially arising from sputtering rate calibration uncertainties and intrinsic differences in detection principles.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
