Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

the manuscript addresses an important topic which is about electrode materials and remaining useful life (RUL) prediction for supercapacitors. It has potential as a review article. However, in its current form the paper lacks systematic review methodology, critical depth, up-to-date and balanced literature coverage, quantitative comparison of methods, and clear takeaways. The authors should comprehensively revise the manuscript along the mandatory points below; if they cannot, the paper risks reject for lack of sufficient novelty, rigor, and scholarly synthesis.

 

-Provide inclusion/exclusion criteria (e.g., experimental, modelling, review, datasets) and a PRISMA flow diagram showing number of records identified, screened, excluded and final included papers.

- Include tables that compare electrode materials (specific surface area, stability, typical capacitance, cycle life reported, electrolyte used) and RUL algorithms (input features, dataset used, performance metrics RMSE/MAE/R², training data size, cross-validation method).

- Include recent, high-impact work (peer-reviewed papers 2020–2025 from independent groups) on MXenes, advanced carbon derivatives, hybrid electrodes, and recent open RUL datasets and benchmarking studies. The current reference set is uneven and includes many older or non-comprehensive sources.

- Discuss dataset sizes, diversity of stress conditions (temperature, current, cycling regimes), and whether cross-validation / test sets were used properly in cited ML works. Call out common pitfalls (data leakage, insufficient generalization, overfitting).

- Discuss computational cost, interpretability, sensor requirements, and uncertainty quantification (confidence intervals, calibration). For RUL models, comment on how models perform under domain shift (different cells, temperatures).

- Provide a figure/taxonomy classifying electrode materials and RUL approaches, their pros/cons, typical performance envelopes, and open questions (e.g., transfer learning across chemistries, physics-informed ML, in-situ diagnostics).

- Add an explicit “Scope and objectives” early on, reorganize sections so that materials and RUL topics are connected (i.e., how electrode choices affect RUL), and include a concise executive summary with actionable recommendations.

- The manuscript must reference community datasets and benchmarking efforts where available (and highlight lack thereof if none exist). Increase number and diversity of citations. current list is insufficient to claim a comprehensive review.

Author Response

In the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have reported on the electrode materials and prediction of cycle stability and remaining service life of supercapacitors.

I have the following comments on the manuscript.

1. Does the figure 2 taken from other sources. If the figure or induvial content of the figures were taken from other sources, it should be cited accordingly. Quality of figure 3 should be improved.
2. The font size of the manuscript is not uniform.
3. Figure 4 supercapacitor plate material should be cited accordingly. Were the images in the figure 4 taken from other sources?

If so, please provide proper citation as well as copyright permission should be taken.

4. Similarly, Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 7 were taken from other publications. Proper references should be given in the caption of the figure. Copyright permission should be taken for all images used from other sources and previous publications.
5. Authors have disused carbon-based materials, Metal Oxides, Conductive Polymers and new materials and structures for the EDLC, Pseudocapacitor and Hybrid Capacitors. Authors should add a table on the recent published data for power density, charge-discharge capability, cycle stability for various discussed materials with configuration of Capacitors
6. How can the data for power density, charge-discharge capability, cycle stability influences the estimation of the cycle life of battery-supercapacitor systems?
7. Please provide the future prospects and conclusions as separate sections. The flow of the manuscript should be corrected as 5. future prospects, then 6. Conclusions.
8. Figure 6 and Figure7 should be large enough to be properly visible.

I recommend major revision of the manuscript for further consideration.

Author Response

In the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The suggested comments are added to the text. this article can be published.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have revised the manuscript according to raised concerns. I recommend acceptance of the manuscript in present form.