Recent Advances in Resistive Gas Sensors: Fundamentals, Material and Device Design, and Intelligent Applications

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

see attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a review paper on resistive gas sensors. The paper is well-written and effectively describes the advances that have occurred in recent years in this important research area. The paper presents the main results obtained with the most studied materials, semiconductor metal oxides (SMOs), their limitations, and the strategies employed to overcome these limitations, including high operating temperatures and low selectivity levels. Many examples of works already published in the literature are presented. The possibility of using other materials to replace SMOs is exemplified in the paper, such as carbon-based materials and a few examples of the use of two-dimensional (2D) materials, including MXenes. A material that has recently been widely used as a resistive gas sensors is transition-metal dichalcogenides (TMDs); examples of these materials were not mentioned in this review paper. These materials have proven to be highly efficient in detecting toxic gases, especially when combined with SMOs, MXenes, and other materials. I understand that it would be important for the most significant results involving TMDa also to be incorporated into this review paper.

 

This review paper also highlights the use of tools such as Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence in the development of resistive gas sensors.

 

In summary, despite the numerous review papers on resistive gas sensors that have already been published, I believe that this paper can provide more current information and add additional insights into resistive gas sensors.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper provides a comprehensive investigation for resistive gas sensors. The manuscript is well written, and presents an interesting scientific content. The paper can be accepted for publication in Chemosensors.

(1) What are the state-of-the-art challenges of the development of resistive gas sensors, please also added author perspective to overcome those challenges.

(2) The authors are suggested to add some tables to compare the sensing performance of resistive gas sensors mentioned in your review manuscript.

(3) The format of figure captions in the manuscript should be consistent.

(4) The selectivity of resistive gas sensors need to be discussed in detail.

(5) Hope the author can add some outlook and opinions on resistive gas sensors in the field of gas sensing at the end.

(6) Some latest literatures related to resistive gas sensors are valuable for being referred to, just as examples Sens. Actuators B Chem. 439 (2025) 137831.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript systematically summarizes the latest developments in the field of resistive gas sensors, covering multiple aspects such as their fundamental working mechanisms, sensing material design, device architecture optimization, and intelligent system integration. It has good academic value and practical guidance significance. The language is generally clear, the cited references are representative, and it provides researchers in the field of resistive gas sensors with a relatively systematic reference and has publication value. However, the manuscript contains relevant aspects that require further clarification. Therefore, I recommend this manuscript to be published in Chemosensors after minor revisions, the corresponding suggestions are given as follows:

1. In the introduction section, the paragraph on “resistive gas sensors” covers their working principles and structure, but it is recommended to briefly emphasize their unique advantages and limitations relative to other types of sensors (such as optical and electrochemical sensors). Reference is recommended to be cited: Chemosensors2025, 13(2), 38.
2. The content of 2.2 Classification section is mainly organized as “materials/structure → examples → data,” which resembles a compilation of references. It is recommended that brief comparisons and summary sentences be added after each category.
3. Key parameters such as sensitivity, selectivity of gas sensors often constrain each other. It is recommended to add a subsection or summary paragraph on performance trade-offs in Section 3. Key Technological Advancements.
4. In the paragraph beginning on page 11, line 390, although it is “Composite Material Design,” it actually repeats the discussion of the mechanism of action of heterojunction structures (such as “p-n type composite” and “interface electron transfer”). It is recommended that this be moved to the corresponding paragraph.
5. The first two subsections of Chapter 4 both discuss “selectivity,” but do not distinguish between whether it is manifested at the material level or the algorithm recognition level. The last two subsections, “optimizing material performance” and “signal decoding/recognition,” do not form a clear hierarchy in the chapter structure. It is recommended that the scope of each subsection be clearly defined.
6. There are minor formatting errors, such as paragraph formatting errors on lines 310 to 311 on page 9; where “For instance, For instance, Wang et al. synthesized” should be corrected to “For instance, Wang et al. synthesized.” on page 10, lines 330 to 331.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf