Planar Multi-Gate Artificial Synaptic Transistor with Solution-Processed AlO_x Solid Electric Double Layer Dielectric and InO_x Channel

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study demonstrates the fabrication and characterization of a planar multi-gate InOx-based artificial synaptic transistor was demonstrated using solution-processed AlOx as electric-double-layer (EDL) dielectric with mobile hydrogen protons.

All the concepts in this manuscript have been demonstrated before in similar types of transistor devices and there is no comparison to other materials that have been used for this application.

The XPS instrumentation is not described in the experimental details.

The reason for the specific device design in Figure 1 is not clear to me.

The oxygen has different oxidation states, which is the reason for the binding energy shift. Are the authors sure there are only 2 peaks? What are the FWHM of the deconvoluted peaks?

Equation 1 is shown but not used.

Why is it difficult to go back to the initial state at higher amplitudes? This is probably not good for the application. What would the authors recommend to fix this?

What about the long-term stability of these transistors? Looking at 10 consecutive peaks is not enough. For stability, we require at least 1000 pulses.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Author must change the introduction part.

Include fabrication schematic for making Multi-gate Artificial Synaptic Transistor  

English is moderate, must be changed.

EPSC calculation graph is not clear.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

In the paper titled "Planar Multi-gate Artificial Synaptic Transistor with Solution processed AlOx Solid Electric-double-layer Dielectric and InOx Channel" the authors have demonstrated multi-gate artificial 59 synaptic transistor with AlOx/InOx stack layer. This work is properly documented and can be considered for publication in coatings after these minor modification.

1. How was it assured that during the photolithography of the InOx layer for forming the channel the underlying dielectric layer was not damaged? The authors should provide a cross-sectional proof (or other experimental proof) of the same.

2. The term PPF is not defined well and should be done for better understanding of all readers.

3. Minor grammatical and syntax errors can be minimized.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript is very intesting and well-written.

I have some comments:

1) The bibliography can be extended

2) More information should be given on the model for excitatory postsynaptic curren (e.g., equation 1)

3) In Figure 4a, for 4 and 5 V, the decay becomes very long. The authors can extend the discussion on that. Can the authors use a specific model?

4) In Figures 5 and 6, the peaks are vey asymmetric. Can the authors extend the discussion on this behaviour?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx