View Decision 是majoy revision
下面是审稿人意见.有希望吗?这可是处女文章呀.
This paper presents the results observed for#####, and technologically important. Although the results are worth publishing, the manuscript must be improved before its publication.
1. The manuscript need careful editing. It is full of typos and gramatical mistakes.
2. Through out the paper, units should be presented in a consistent and standard way (eg: 880 nm rather than 880nm).
3. In Figures 2(a) and 2(b), \"Bind Energy(eV)\" should read as \"Binding Energy (eV)\".
4. Figures 3(a) and 3(b) are not very useful. Show I-V in a Log(I) versus V form, indicate ideality factor (n) values with barrier heights to see the accuracy of barrier heights. Therefore include n values in Table 2.
5. According to Table 2, if I-V barrier heights are measured accurately with corresponding low n values, following conclusions can be made.
** After ### etching####are fixed at 0.82+-0.02 eV. Therefore it seems that Fermi level is pinned at this level.
** After ####, the surface must have oxidised. These oxide layers then act as an I layer in a MIS structure. Therefore barrier height increase can be explained. If this etch does not leave any oxide on the surface (I doubted), this treatment also pins the Fermi level at 0.91+-0.02 eV. But the authors conclude that there is no Fermi level pinning in this case.
编辑意见
Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will see that they are advising that you revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision.
For your guidance, reviewers\' comments are appended below.
If you decide to revise the work, please submit a list of changes or a rebuttal against each point which is being raised when you submit the revised manuscript.
最新回复
cquboiler (2007-2-16 15:16:36)
pcr (2007-2-16 16:11:02)
要转贴的话最好全部转过来，这样的帖子可能不常来论坛的人会回上一贴，对经常来的人来说看了觉得是受骗。