Enhancing the UV Response of All-Inorganic Perovskite Photodetectors by Introducing the Mist-CVD-Grown Gallium Oxide Layer

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Distinguished Editor

 

For the following reasons, I recommend that the manuscript be accepted as is, without any significant modifications:

1- The manuscript is written in the sound language, and the phrases are sequential and interconnected.

2- The title is clear and reflects the contents of the manuscript.

3- Novelty is clear in the manuscript.

 4- The measurements are sufficient and clear

5- References are current and relevant.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

       1.       You need describe all abbreviations after the first mention in the article.

2.       The details of measurements are described unsatisfactorily. How was X-ray diffraction interpreted? What database was used? Give the card number from the database.

3.       In Figure 1b, the inscriptions are not readable on the insert

4.       Based on what data did you conclude that the crystalline phase of CsPbBr3 precipitated?

5.       Was reflection and scattering at interfaces between layers taken into account? At different wavelengths and directions of irradiation (from perovskite and sapphire side), different light intensities will fall on the layers, since part of the radiation will be lost to reflection/scattering. And it will lead to different photoresponse of the photodiode

6.       The characteristics of the photodiode from the article are difficult to compare with analogues. It is necessary to add literature data to tables 1 and 2

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This study reports the utilization of the mist-CVD method to introduce a gallium oxide layer onto the photodetectors. Some results of this work are quite interesting, but some points require to be clarified before publication.

 

1. The author needs to give more details about the background of mist-CVD in the introduction section.
2. In order to confirm the success of device fabrication, the authors must provide the SEM images and EDX analysis of the cross-section of two types of prepared devices. Moreover, the authors should also measure each deposited layer's thickness.
3. Why is one of the lattice indices of the beta gallium oxide phase assigned as a negative value rather than a positive one?
4. Glazing incident XRD recorded at different incident angles is recommended to be performed to identify the phase composition of the deposit layers.
5. The authors should supply the band gap calculation in the online supporting information.
6. The y-axis scales for Figures 3 (c) and (d) are inconsistent.
7. The authors should give a numerical comparison of the photodetector efficiencies of this present work and the values in the previous literature.
8. In my opinion, the article title is too general.
9. The current conclusion is not convincing.    
10. References are mostly in the introduction and experimental sections. Only a few references are in the results and discussion section.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The concerns have been carefully addressed. Therefore, I recommend publishing this article as it is.