Application of Ba0.5Sr0.5TiO3 (Bst) Film Doped with 0%, 2%, 4% and 6% Concentrations of RuO2 as an Arduino Nano-Based Bad Breath Sensor
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In "Application of Ba0.5sr0.5tio3 (Bst) Film Doped With 0%, 2%, 4% And 6% Concentrations of Ruo2 as an Arduino Nano-Based Bad Breath Sensor" the authors provide a step-by-step overview of their process to build a "bad breath sensor." The manuscript is generally clear and provides an excellent level of detail regarding the construction of the sensor. I have no major concerns with the procedures/methods. I have a few minor suggestions that I think would improve the manuscript and I have detailed them below.
1. Abstract, line 16. The temperature is incorrectly typeset. I would suggest using "850$^{\circ}$C.
2. Intro, line 31. "...by the debris of food..." could be rewritten as "Halitosis is caused by food debris left in the mouth..."
3. Intro, line 32. Omit "which is" and just use "by". 4. Intro, line 39. Omit "the" at the end of this line.
5. Intro, line 40. Omit "that come".
6. Intro, line 61. Add "is" after "method".
7. Intro, line 62. Omit "a" and "an" to make "...with good quality, an easy procedure, and..."
8. Intro, line 63. Change "in" to "of" to make "...method of making thing films..."
9. I think Figure 2 is not necessary and adds little value to the manuscript.
10. Figure 4. Please just put the annealing temp on the y-axis (850 deg C). Also, most of the figures have very minimal legends and more detail about the figures should be included in the legends.
11. Figure 6. Please make Panels (a) and (b) larger so they are more legible and one can see the details presented in the figure.
12. Figure 8. The letters "a, b, c, d" are truncated in my PDF. Please check this and fix. Also, include a description of what a, b, c, d are in the legend (yes, I know it's in the text of the preceding paragraph!).
13. Figures 9 & 10. These could be combined to make one figure with two panels for convenience.
14. Figure 11 is also unnecessary in my opinion.
15. Results & Discussion, line 291. I think "fragrant" is quite subjective and it would probably be more useful for the investigators and eventual users of the sensor to have something that is more concretely defined.
16. Figures 12, 13, 14. These figures are mislabeled and, because it is very difficult to read the LCD displays, I would suggest just combining these into one figure with three panels and a diagram/drawing of the output rather than a photograph.
17. So what is this device really meant for? I would like to see a more extensive rationale and some conclusions that reflect some of the authors' ideas about what their device can be applied to in terms of real-world problems. Is the device just meant as a fashion accessory to insure that our breath is acceptable as we go out of the door in
the morning or to socialize at night? Is there a translational medical sensor application to detect disease related to mouth bacteria? Can this be used as an inexpensive way to assess the microbiome of an individual? Tying in these applications would motivate the paper better and tie the work back to useful applications.
Author Response
Hello mr/mrs.
The honorable.
Previously, we thank you for the response. Next, we explain our response to your comment. thank you
Answer: Revised (line 16)
Intro, line 31. "...by the debris of food..." could be rewritten as "Halitosis is caused by food debris left in the mouth..."Answer: Revised (line 31)
Intro, line 32. Omit "which is" and just use "by"Answer: Revised (line 32)
Intro, line 39. Omit "the" at the end of this line.Answer: Revised (line 39)
Intro, line 40. Omit "that come".Answer:Revised (line 40)
Intro, line 61. Add "is" after "method".Answer: Revised (line 61)
Intro, line 62. Omit "a" and "an" to make "...with good quality, an easy procedure, and..."Answer:Revised (line 62)
Intro, line 63. Change "in" to "of" to make "...method of making thing lms..."Answer: Revised (line 63)
I think Figure 2 is not necessary and adds little value to the manuscript.Answer: Figure 2 The presursor solution for Ba0.5Sr0.5TiO3 doped with a variation of RuO2 concentrations (0%, 2%, 4% and 6%), has been deleted.
Figure 4. Please just put the annealing temp on the y-axis (850 deg C). Also, most of the gures have very minimal legends and more detail about the gures should be included in the legends.Answer:Revised. Figure 4 Changes to Figure 3 (line 114)
Answer:Revised. Figure 6 Changes to Figure 5 (line 132)
Figure 8. The letters "a, b, c, d" are truncated in my PDF. Please check this and x. Also, include a description of what a, b, c, d are in the legend (yes, I know it's in the text of the preceding paragraph!)Answer:Revised. Figure 8 Changes to Figure 7 (line 161)
Figures 9 & 10. These could be combined to make one gure with two panels for convenience.Answer: Revised. Figures 9 & 10 have been merged into Figure 8 (a) and Figure 8 (b) (line 204)
Figure 11 is also unnecessary in my opinion.Answer: Revised. Image has been deleted
Results & Discussion, line 293. I think "fragrant" is quite subjective and it would probably be more useful for the investigators and eventual users of the sensor to have something that is more concretely dened.Answer:Has been answered. Table 3 (lines 283) and paragraphs (lines 288 through line 293) answer statement number 15 from the reviewer
Figures 12, 13, 14. These gures are mislabeled and, because it is very dicult to read the LCD displays, I would suggest just combining these into one gure with three panels and a diagram/drawing of the output rather than a photograph.Answer:Revised. Figures 12, 13, 14 have been merged into Figures 9 (a), 9 (b), 9 (c) (line 294)
So what is this device really meant for? I would like to see a more extensive rationale and some conclusions that reect some of the authors' ideas about what their device can be applied to in terms of real-world problems. Is the device just meant as a fashion accessory to insure that our breath is acceptable as we go out of the door in the morning or to socialize at night? Is there a translational medical sensor application to detect disease related to mouth bacteria? Can this be used as an inexpensive way to assess the microbiome of an individual? Tying in these applications would motivate the paper better and tie the work back to useful applications.Answer: Already answered (lines 296 to 332)
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Figure 8 isn't legible. Figure 13-15 need to be presented in a different setting -change brightness, contrast, etc, to make it presentable.
Types of Halitosis and methods of detection must be illustrated to establish the exact purpose of the study.
Current devices and technologies used at the moment must be listed and a justification for research should be included in this article.
How is the device going to be used? i.e. is it wearable, or is it made to be affixed to patient's month? inside or outside -like a mic?
How do we know if the toothpaste smell - as in the odour is not detected sue to predominance of the toothpaste smell itself- is giving the "fragrant" reading?
Health and safety measures: any chance or electrocuting the user ? is the device saliva-friendly? toxicity, etc.
Author Response
Hello, mr/mrs
The honorable
Previously, we thank you for the response. Next, we explain our response to your comment. thank you
Figure 8 isn't legible. Figure 13-15 need to be presented in a different setting -change brightness, contrast, etc, to make it presentable.
Answer:
Revised. Image 8 has been fixed (line 168). Figure 13-15. Sorry, an error occurred. Figure 12-14 should be. Image display has been improved (line 314, line 318, line 322)
Types of Halitosis and methods of detection must be illustrated to establish the exact purpose of the study
Answer:
Revised (line 341)
Halitosis is a medical term for bad breath and bad breath. Halitosis is a very common condition. According to the American Dental Association, at least 50 percent of adults around the world have bad breath. So generally, many do not realize that they have this condition
Oral hygiene is one that often escapes attention despite brushing your teeth every day. Sometimes the unpleasant odor is still a problem, especially when you want to have an important meeting, of course, bad breath does not want to be a thing that will interfere. The appearance of the odor is generally caused by bacteria that develop wild in the mouth. These bacteria produce sulfur gas. This gas is the focus of the reading of this device. As a result, when someone opens or exhales through the mouth, a pungent odor of sulfur gas comes out.
Current devices and technologies used at the moment must be listed and a justication for research should be included in this article.
Answer:
Revised (line 352)
One recent innovation for oral hygiene has been present before. the innovation was called Breathometer Mint. The tool is used to monitor the user's mouth odor. With this tool, the user can find out whether the condition of the oral cavity is in good or bad condition. This device is integrated with applications on smartphones that will provide information about the user's oral cavity. Its use is quite practical, the tool is simply inserted into the mouth, then the user can exhale through his mouth. Then the Breathometer will detect the level of bacteria in the mouth. It could be if the number of bacteria in the oral cavity becomes high, causing an unpleasant odor. Unfortunately, the tool can only be used to monitor the number of bacteria in the mouth, but can not read the distinctive odor of the type of gas that makes the mouth smell. This is the background of making Ba0.5Sr0.5TiO3 film application which is doped with RuO2 6% as an Arduino nano-based odor detection sensor. This tool can read bad breath from the type of gas released
How is the device going to be used? i.e. is it wearable, or is it made to be axed to patient's month? inside or outside -like a mic?
Answer:
Revised (line 327)
This tool is made to facilitate users in detecting bad breath, so the tool can be carried everywhere by the user. The dimensions of the tool are shown in Figure 7. The position of the sensor is right inside the packaging container such as a microphone. Users can use the tool by: first, the user activates the switch to the on position. Second, the user blows the microphone in which there is a mouth odor sensor. Input in the form of bad breath will be read and processed by the microcontroller. The results of the microcontroller processing will be displayed on the 16x2 LCD as shown in Figure 12, Figure 13 and Figure 14.
How do we know if the toothpaste smell - as in the odour is not detected sue to predominance of the toothpaste smell itself- is giving the "fragrant" reading?
Answer:
Revised. In Table 2 (there are additional tests). (Line 186)
Table 2 explains that bad breath after cleaning (after brushing your teeth) and odor after 15 minutes after brushing your teeth + eating produce output values that do not differ much. It means that the condition read by the Ba0.5 Sr0.5TiO3 film doped with RuO2 6% is not the odor from the toothpaste, but the bad breath from the bad breath gas in the oral cavity.
In Table 3 (addition of Table). (Line 305)
|
|
Output voltage |
||
|
Before cleansing (straight out of bed) (mv) |
After cleansing (after brushing teeth)
(mv) |
After 15 minutes after (after brushing teeth+eat) (mV) |
|
|
Ba0.5Sr0.5TiO3 film with 6% doping variations |
12.9 |
42.1 |
41.9 |
| Gas sensor manufacturer's products (MQ 136) |
12.7 |
42.4 |
42.2 |
| ∆V (mV) |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
|
Accuracy (%) |
98.4 |
99.3 |
99.3 |
The MQ 136 sensor is a semiconductor component that functions as an odorant for tin oxide gas (SnO2). The MQ 136 gas sensor has a high sensitivity to SO2. MQ 136 can also be used to detect other vapors containing Sulfur. Table 3 shows that the Ba0.5Sr0.5TiO3 film with 6% RuO2 doping variation shows the average accuracy of the tool by 99% against the MQ 136 sensor. This proves that the Ba0.5Sr0.5TiO3 film testing with the 6% RuO2 doping variation is shown Figure 12, Figure 13 and Figure 14 are an objective result of reading bad breath. (line 307)
Health and safety measures: any chance or electrocuting the user ? is the device saliva-friendly? toxicity, etc.
Answer:
Revised (line 334)
Figure (7a), Figure 12, Figure 13 and Figure 14 show that this device has safety from electricity. Besides using only DC power supplies, electronic components are inside a packaging container made of insulating type material. So that this tool can be safe from electricity. The Ru02 doped BaO.5Sr0.5TiO3 film cover container is also friendly from saliva and toxins. The mouth or saliva that touches the RuO2 doped BaO.5Sr0.5TiO3 film cover container will not provide any electrical response because the container is coated with an insulating material, making it very safe.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments in previous revisions in order: 1-Figure 8 &13-15 (now Figure 7 and 9) are OK. 2-I believe the revised paragraph is 314 in page 11? ideally this should be at the start of the article. 3-I think the revised paragraph is in line 325 page 11-12? a citation for the breathometer is still missing. The article should have a clear reference that describe this breathometer in details. 4-I think Figure 6 is for the dimensions? it is not legible and need to be updated. Revisions are in line 296? 5-first revision is line 200? second is in line 285? 6-revision are in line 303? "mv" units in tables should be "mV"Author Response
Hello, mr/mrs
The honorable
Previously, we thank you for the response. Next, we explain our response to your comment. thank you.
1. Figure 8 &13-15 (now Figure 7 and 9) are OK.
Answer: Thanks you
2. I believe the revised paragraph is 314 in page 11? ideally this should be at the start of the article.
Answer: Revised. The paragraph is moved at the beginning of the explanation for the "Testing the Entire System" section as the main paragraph. (line 263)
3. I think the revised paragraph is in line 325 page 11-12? a citation for the breathometer is still missing. The article should have a clear reference that describe this breathometer in details.
Answer: Revised. Reference citations are written in line 328
4. I think Figure 6 is for the dimensions? it is not legible and need to be updated. Revisions are in line 296?
Answer: Figure 6 has been revised. Figure 6 has been revised, yes the revision is on line 296, has been moved to line 303
5. first revision is line 200? second is in line 285? 6-revision are in line 303? "mv" units in tables should be "mV"
Answer: Revised
first revision is line 200, revised
second is in line 285 revised. The revised results moved to line 290
revision are in line 303 revised. The revised results moved to line 310
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
