24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题，作者zh5266779将赠送您 19 个金币

zh5266779

金虫 (小有名气)

应助: 2 (幼儿园)
金币: 634.6
散金: 31
红花: 3
帖子: 83
在线: 87.1小时
虫号: 2760465
注册: 2013-10-28
性别: GG
专业: 半导体科学与信息器件

[求助] PR applied重新投稿意见还是不好，求建议已有1人参与

The above manuscript has been reviewed by our referees.

The resulting reports include a critique which we feel is serious
enough that it must be answered before we can reach a decision on the
disposition of the paper. We append pertinent comments.

You may choose to resubmit the manuscript with revisions you find
appropriate. With any resubmittal, please include a summary of changes
made and a brief response to all recommendations and criticisms.

Yours sincerely,

Juan-Jose Lietor-Santos
Associate Editor
Physical Review Applied
Email: prapplied@aps.org
https://journals.aps.org/prapplied
Celebrating our 5th Anniversary.

Physical Review Research is now open for submissions! As an
introductory promotion APS is waiving publication charges for all
articles received in 2019 and published in this new open access,
multidisciplinary journal.

https://journals.aps.org/prresearch
@PhysRevResearch on Twitter

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Second Report of Referee A -- NC10089/Zhang
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The author have responded to many of criticisms from the both
referee. However, to my understanding, their action is not sufficient.

I understand that there have not been similar analyses of experimental
results as the author presents. Nevertheless, it is possible to
compute the induced currents in all the configurations tested by the
authors and then to compare the results with the experimental ones. The
material is not a very difficult one for such theoretical analysis.

And as to the relevance to applications, I entirely don't understand
why the current study gives any contribution. Estimating the ratio of
the mobilities and densities of electrons and holes could be done by
other currently available methods, such as simple standard Hall effects
or magnetooptical Kerr effects. Moreover, it is not clear why simply
distinguishing electron and Hall contributions to the inverse spin
Hall effects promotes the application.

Without any comparison with results or analyses of conventional
experimental technique, say, the ratio of carrier densities and
mobilities, it is not possible to judge the reliability of the
manuscript.

I also stress that the terminogoly associated with the anomalous Hall
effect is misleading, as the authors seems to admit in the reply. Even
if the term was used by others in previous studies already published,
it should be corrected or explained to avoid confusions.

I strongly recommend that the authors expand the length to explain in
more detail the motivation, the technical part of the experiments,
phenomenological arguments, analyses of experimental results, and
comparison with other works which are useful to estimate the
phenomenological parameters.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Second Report of Referee B -- NC10089/Zhang
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The authors made a reasonable revision, and I recommend the
publication.

求助，第一个审稿人似乎对稿件意见很大，不知道如何回答了。

回复此楼