Next Article in Journal
Photocatalytic Inactivation of Plant Pathogenic Bacteria Using TiO2 Nanoparticles Prepared Hydrothermally
Next Article in Special Issue
Flax-Derived Carbon: A Highly Durable Electrode Material for Electrochemical Double-Layer Supercapacitors
Previous Article in Journal
Aerogels Based on Reduced Graphene Oxide/Cellulose Composites: Preparation and Vapour Sensing Abilities
Previous Article in Special Issue
Rapid Carbon Formation from Spontaneous Reaction of Ferrocene and Liquid Bromine at Ambient Conditions
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

New Limits for Stability of Supercapacitor Electrode Material Based on Graphene Derivative

Nanomaterials 2020, 10(9), 1731; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10091731
by Veronika Šedajová 1,2,†, Petr Jakubec 1,*,†, Aristides Bakandritsos 1, Václav Ranc 1 and Michal Otyepka 1,2,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Nanomaterials 2020, 10(9), 1731; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10091731
Submission received: 29 July 2020 / Revised: 24 August 2020 / Accepted: 28 August 2020 / Published: 31 August 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Graphene-Related Materials: Synthesis and Applications)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please see the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report


There is a little contradiction at the beginning of the abstract where supercapacitors are said to feature excellent cycling stability and immediately this is possed under question.

The authors used the four-point probe method to test the conductivity of GA. For this method form factor and sample size are parameters to be considered carefully; I recommend developing this part.

Figure 4.e seems to be quite obvious as a capacitor device it is. What is the information that can be extracted from it?

Figure 4.f (left) shows "LED without supercapacitor", what the authors mean by that? Is it just an open circuit LED?

A quantitative comparison with other approaches is missing to evaluate the importance of the achievements.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have revised their manuscript according to the referee’s comments.  Therefore, the paper can be accepted in present form.

Back to TopTop