Recent Progress on Preparation Strategies of Liquid Crystal Smart Windows
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Firstly the review is extensive in its coverage of the different strategies to examine liquid crystal smart windows. The review is nicely written with a good level of language.
Although the coverage of the range of technologies is excellent I feel that the review could be enhanced by going into some specific examples within each sections. At the moment the review gives an overview of the optical effects and the references support the overview but the review would be more impactful if there were some specific examples to demonstrate state-of-art work within the areas. By this I mean that the audience would benefit from examples of structure of materials, demonstrate how different modifications would enhance the electro-optic responses, optical response etc. Examples such as within the pdlc section - what additives are best since there are so many different approaches using nanoparticles, dyes, ionic dopants etc.
I would overall recommend that a small revision to the manuscript to address the above concerns is required but I would be supportive of publication after these have been addressed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This is a comprehensive review of very interesting and rapidly expanding field of switchable liquid crystal (LC) smart windows. Such windows indeed have numerous potential practical applications depending on the type of used LC and the mechanism of its switching. The authors cover a number of very different such mechanisms and, importantly, provide a very reasonable categorization of the diverse multitude of reported approaches. I believe that the review will be very useful for the broad audience of researchers from both fundamental and practical points of view.
Having no major critical remarks, I strongly recommend though subjecting the manuscript to a scrupulous language check. It contains numerous truly disappointing errors and bad wording. Just a few examples from the first 100 lines:
- “nature light” should be “natural light”, line 9 of abstract
- “in a privacy spaces” should read “private spaces”, line 51
- “by electrically controlled reorientation direction of LCs” should read “by electrically controlled reorientation of LC director”, line 76
- “the helical axis of CLCs is aligned along the substrate” should be “the helical axis of CLCs is aligned orthogonally to the substrate”, line 94
- “When applied the high-frequency voltage is” should read “When the high-frequency voltage is applied”, line 99.
Also, as a general recommendation, I would like to point out that one expects from such a comprehensive review an explicit summary of the achieved practically important characteristics of all discussed windows: levels of transmittance in different states, characteristic switching times, etc. A table summarizing them all would be much appreciated by every reader.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This review paper describes the recent progress of liquid crystalline smart windows operating in single and dual modes. That manuscript is well prepared and the references are appropriate. I only suggest using a uniform temperature unit: either Celsriuss degree or Kelvin degree (page 4, section 2.2). I recommend this paper for publication in the Crystals after the authors have made the suggested changes.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
