Effects in the Optical and Structural Properties Caused by Mg or Zn Doping of GaN Films Grown via Radio-Frequency Magnetron Sputtering Using Laboratory-Prepared Targets
, Gustavo Alonso Hirata 5, Enrique Rosendo 2, José Alberto Luna 2, Mario Robles 1, Jorge Alberto Rodríguez 1 and Yani Dallane Ramírez 6Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please look in the attached PDF file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
June 30st, 2021
Jinnaphat Khamsom
Assistant Editor
Applied Sciences
Reviewer 1
Manuscript ID: applsci-1281624
Dear Mr. Jinnaphat Khamsom, and Reviewer
Enclosed you will find the revised version of the manuscript: “Effects in the optical and structural properties caused by Mg or Zn doping of GaN films grown via radio-frequency magnetron sputtering using laboratory-prepared targets", by Erick Gastellóu, Godofredo García, Ana Maria Herrera, Crisoforo Morales, Rafael García, Gustavo Alonso Hirata, Enrique Rosendo, José Alberto Luna, Mario Robles, Jorge Alberto Rodríguez, and Yani Dallane Ramírez. We have performed several changes in the text to answer all indications requested by the assistant editor. We feel that their observations allowed us to improve substantially the quality of our work, and hence we manifest our thanks to the professional job they performed in the review of our manuscript.
In the revised manuscript, the sentences underlined in yellow correspond to the corrections of the first reviewer; in addition, a thorough review of the manuscript was carried out with respect to the comments of the first reviewer. Also the manuscript was proofread by a native grammar checker.
Yours Sincerely
Dr. Erick Gastellóu
Corresponding author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In this paper, the authors report the sputter-growth of GaN films with Mg or Zn incorporation on silicon substrates at room temperature by using laboratory-prepared targets with Mg-doped or Zn-doped GaN powders. The structure, surface morphology, composition, and optical etc were then analyzed. It is revealed that the films are nanocrystalline and Mg or Zn was included inside the GaN films. This work is interesting and suitable for the publication in Appl. Surf. Here are the comments needed to be addressed before publication.
(1) For the grain size, there is inconsistency between SEM and XRD. Please explain the reason. The SEM is not so clear for the readers.
(2) In the XPS, please show the O1s spectra, which can disclose the bonding states of Ga, Mg or ZnO. The oxygen content should be calculated roughly.
(3) The content of Mg or Zn is so high in the GaN. I am wondering there are clusters formation for Mg or Zn or oxides formation.
(4) The motivation for sputter-growth GaN is not so clear. Obviously, sputter-growth GaN is not suitable for LED and electronic devices. However, as a buffer layer for MOCVD growth GaN may be possible in Si substrate (doi: 10.1088/1674-4926/40/10/102801). In such a case, the thickness is ~100nm. Another application of sputter-growth GaN can be MEMS (see. i.e. DOI:10.1080/26941112.2021.1877019), which does not require so high crystal quality and purity. Even the piezoelectric properties of GaN can be used for MEMS sensors. In this case, micrometer will be favorable. The authors can analyze the thin films with different thicknesses from ~10nm to several um, at least by SEM or PL.
Author Response
June 30st, 2021
Jinnaphat Khamsom
Assistant Editor
Applied Sciences
Reviewer 2
Manuscript ID: applsci-1281624
Dear Mr. Jinnaphat Khamsom, and Reviewer
Enclosed you will find the revised version of the manuscript: “Effects in the optical and structural properties caused by Mg or Zn doping of GaN films grown via radio-frequency magnetron sputtering using laboratory-prepared targets", by Erick Gastellóu, Godofredo García, Ana Maria Herrera, Crisoforo Morales, Rafael García, Gustavo Alonso Hirata, Enrique Rosendo, José Alberto Luna, Mario Robles, Jorge Alberto Rodríguez, and Yani Dallane Ramírez. We have performed several changes in the text to answer all indications requested by the assistant editor. We feel that their observations allowed us to improve substantially the quality of our work, and hence we manifest our thanks to the professional job they performed in the review of our manuscript.
In the revised manuscript, the sentences underlined in green correspond to the corrections of the second reviewer; in addition, a thorough review of the manuscript was carried out regarding the comments of the second reviewer. Also the manuscript was proofread by a native grammar checker.
Yours Sincerely
Dr. Erick Gastellóu
Corresponding author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript is well written, a motivation for experiments should be strongly written.
Experimental did not show full conditions for analysis of crystal structure.
Did you confirm p- type conduction of Zn (or Mg) doped GaN films?
Some sentences should be corrected to make it easier to read or to increase the level of editing. These doubts are in lines 57-61, 164, 165, 197-200, 248, 255-257,
English and corrections are required in lines 77, 208, 237, 238, 239, 272, 274, 275, 283-284.
Fig. 6 shows a distance at a leveled below zero.
References concerning sputtered GaN films are not enough representative.
Author Response
June 30st, 2021
Jinnaphat Khamsom
Assistant Editor
Applied Sciences
Reviewer 3
Manuscript ID: applsci-1281624
Dear Mr. Jinnaphat Khamsom, and Reviewer
Enclosed you will find the revised version of the manuscript: “Effects in the optical and structural properties caused by Mg or Zn doping of GaN films grown via radio-frequency magnetron sputtering using laboratory-prepared targets", by Erick Gastellóu, Godofredo García, Ana Maria Herrera, Crisoforo Morales, Rafael García, Gustavo Alonso Hirata, Enrique Rosendo, José Alberto Luna, Mario Robles, Jorge Alberto Rodríguez, and Yani Dallane Ramírez. We have performed several changes in the text to answer all indications requested by the assistant editor. We feel that their observations allowed us to improve substantially the quality of our work, and hence we manifest our thanks to the professional job they performed in the review of our manuscript.
In the revised manuscript, the sentences underlined in blue correspond to the corrections of the third reviewer; in addition, a thorough review of the manuscript was carried out regarding the comments of the third reviewer. Also the manuscript was proofread by a native grammar checker.
Yours Sincerely
Dr. Erick Gastellóu
Corresponding author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Editor, dear Autors,
The paper was carefully corrected, so I can recommend it for publication. Only one comment: In previous review, I had advised that "p-type" should be written with small letter 'p' and authors corrected these in many places. But when it is at the beginning of a title like in Ref. 10 "P-type conduction .in Mg-doped GaN treated with low-energy electron beam irradiation.", the 'P' should be in uppercase.
I think that grammar still needs some minor editorial corrections.
Author Response
July 12st, 2021
Jinnaphat Khamsom
Assistant Editor
Applied Sciences
Reviewer 1
Manuscript ID: applsci-1281624
Dear Mr. Jinnaphat Khamsom, and Reviewer
Enclosed you will find the revised version of the manuscript: “Effects in the optical and structural properties caused by Mg or Zn doping of GaN films grown via radio-frequency magnetron sputtering using laboratory-prepared targets", by Erick Gastellóu, Godofredo García, Ana Maria Herrera, Crisoforo Morales, Rafael García, Gustavo Alonso Hirata, Enrique Rosendo, José Alberto Luna, Mario Robles, Jorge Alberto Rodríguez, and Yani Dallane Ramírez. We have implemented several changes in the text to answer all indications requested by the assistant editor. We believe that their observations allowed us to improve substantially the quality of our work, and hence we manifest our gratitude to the professional job they did in the review of our manuscript.
In the revised manuscript, the sentences underlined in yellow correspond to the corrections of the first reviewer; in addition to this, a thorough review of the manuscript was carried out taking into account the comments of the first reviewer. The manuscript was also proofread again by a native grammar checker.
Yours Sincerely
Dr. Erick Gastellóu
Corresponding author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Accepted
Author Response
July 12st, 2021
Jinnaphat Khamsom
Assistant Editor
Applied Sciences
Reviewer 2
Manuscript ID: applsci-1281624
Dear Mr. Jinnaphat Khamsom, and Reviewer
Enclosed you will find the revised version of the manuscript: “Effects in the optical and structural properties caused by Mg or Zn doping of GaN films grown via radio-frequency magnetron sputtering using laboratory-prepared targets", by Erick Gastellóu, Godofredo García, Ana Maria Herrera, Crisoforo Morales, Rafael García, Gustavo Alonso Hirata, Enrique Rosendo, José Alberto Luna, Mario Robles, Jorge Alberto Rodríguez, and Yani Dallane Ramírez. We our gratitude to the professional job they did in the review of our manuscript.
The manuscript was also proofread again by a native grammar checker.
Yours Sincerely
Dr. Erick Gastellóu
Corresponding author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Authors did not improve the manuscript carefully, some doubts are mentioned below.
Line 57-59, the activation technique of atoms called ʺlow‐energy electron beam irradiation (LEEBI) ʺ - it is not adequate process for standard applications!
next: “MBE generally uses the implantation of Mg atoms during the growth process of the material [13 ‐ 15]. “ This description is misunderstanding, because implantation is other technique, independent on MBE.
Line 146 , “… a Bruker AXS D8 discover equipment with a wavelength (Cu K) of 1.5406 Å. “
put here: … equipped with a wavelength (Cu Kα) of 1.5406 Å.
Line 148, put 1 s against 1 seg.
Line 156 : “… a Escalab 250Xi Brochure equipment in an energy …” – what do you like to say?
Line 171 , “ …the deposit technique, which does not produce good crystalline quality in the layers [22],” – an unfortunate sentence, because sputtering method can deposit also good crystalline quality films, if sputtered material is deposited on heated substrates.
Line 173 , Figure 2 is only one, here are lines a, b, c.
Line 179, “ the (102) and (110) planes do not favor the crystalline growth, which could be related to the number of species of GaN adhered to the substrate during the films deposit by sputtering.” – A misunderstanding, because (1) the planes cannot favor a growth, (2) the number of species is 2 in GaN, so what do you want to write?
Line 189, “Figure 3a), showed an irregular grains surface with a grain size average of 0.14 μm. Figure 3b) also demonstrated…” – it is not visible, because of a scale of 1 micrometer! Connection of the grain size average of 0.16 μm with the 7 nm crystal size is not clear and doubtful.
Line 235, “ Figure 5a) had a (002) plane orientation with a lattice constant of a = 3.18 Å, and c = 5.18 Å, for the hexagonal structure. “ – Figure 5a nor a plane orientation does not have a lattice constant!
Line 237 “ the electron diffraction pattern for the sample of Figure 5a), …” gramma correction required.
Line 250, “Figure 6b), demonstrated a decrease significant in the roughness behavior in the step for the Zn‐doped GaN films” - Fig. 6 can not present roughness in this vertical scale! Additional analysis should be performed.
Line 276, “The b emission peak is located in a range from 2.6 to 2.88 eV (476.92 – 430.55 nm) belongs to the Zn‐doped GaN films.” gramma correction required.
Resistivity seems to be good , but it does not prove p-type conductivity. Author did not respond on this problem. Oxygen impurities can strongly influence on electrical conductivity.
Photoluminescence spectra are shown only roughly. No deep discussion.
A hysteresis effect is mentioned, but it does not influence on the deposited film. It does not make a sense to write about the effect.
Ref. 27 is not related to a point in the manuscript.
References concerning sputtered GaN films are not enough representative.
Conclusions do not represent the most important achievements relative to others known from the papers.
Generally the manuscript has been improved to better reading, but not sufficiently in merit to publish it in this form.
Author Response
July 12st, 2021
Jinnaphat Khamsom
Assistant Editor
Applied Sciences
Reviewer 3
Manuscript ID: applsci-1281624
Dear Mr. Jinnaphat Khamsom, and Reviewer
Enclosed you will find the revised version of the manuscript: “Effects in the optical and structural properties caused by Mg or Zn doping of GaN films grown via radio-frequency magnetron sputtering using laboratory-prepared targets", by Erick Gastellóu, Godofredo García, Ana Maria Herrera, Crisoforo Morales, Rafael García, Gustavo Alonso Hirata, Enrique Rosendo, José Alberto Luna, Mario Robles, Jorge Alberto Rodríguez, and Yani Dallane Ramírez. We have implemented several changes in the text to answer all indications requested by the assistant editor. We believe that their observations allowed us to improve substantially the quality of our work, and hence we manifest our gratitude to the professional job they did in the review of our manuscript.
In the revised manuscript, the sentences underlined in green correspond to the
corrections of the third reviewer; in addition to this, a thorough review of the
manuscript was carried out taking into account the comments of the third reviewer. The manuscript was also proofread by a native grammar checker.
Yours Sincerely
Dr. Erick Gastellóu
[email protected]
Corresponding author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
Manuscript has been improved, but not in all details.
A word deposit is not correctly used in the manuscript, because Authors write about a process, so put deposition against deposit.
line 132,…, 135 - put more cleared description:
A separation distance between the substrate and the target of 40 mm was applied. A chamber vacuum attained pressure of 2×10‐6 Torr before the layer growth. An N2 flow was used during sputtering, RF power of 50 W and a gas pressure of 25×10‐3 Torr were kept during the sputtering deposition. It was also required a long deposition time of 8 hours to grow a thick layer.
Lines 196 , 197 … as was shown with the ICDD PDF‐4+ 2018 software and the Debye‐Scherrer equation in the XRD analysis. – unfortunately described .
To be clear put : … as can be calculated from the XRD analysis using the ICDD PDF‐4- 2018 software and the Debye‐Scherrer equation.
Why do you apply a bracket at numbers of Figures like 5a), but in others case not?
References 22 and 20 are good , but the their number is not enough representative to reveal importance of known scientific works in GaN technology.
- Arakawa, K. Ueno, A. Kobayashi, J. Ohta, H. Fujioka, High hole mobility p-type GaN with low residual hydrogen concentration prepared by pulsed sputtering, APL Mater. 4, 086103 (2016).
- F. Huq, R.Y. Garza, R. Garcia-Perez, Characteristics of GaN Thin Films Using Magnetron Sputtering System, Journal of Modern Physics, 2016, 7, 2028-2037. C.W. Zou, M.L. Yin, M. Li, C.S. Liu, L.P. Guo, D.J. Fu, GaN films deposited on glass substrate by middle-frequency magnetron sputtering, Thin Solid Films 517 (2008) 670–673.
- W. Zou, M.L. Yin, M. Li, C.S. Liu, L.P. Guo, D.J. Fu, GaN films deposited on glass substrate by middle-frequency magnetron sputtering, Thin Solid Films 517 (2008) 670–673
- C. Knox-Davies, J.M. Shannon, S.R.P. Silva, The properties and deposition process of GaN films grown by reactive sputtering at low temperatures, Journal of Applied Physics 99, 073503 (2006).
And others.
Author Response
July 17st, 2021
Jinnaphat Khamsom
Assistant Editor
Applied Sciences
Reviewer 3
Manuscript ID: applsci-1281624
Dear Mr. Jinnaphat Khamsom, and Reviewer
Enclosed you will find the revised version of the manuscript: “Effects in the optical and structural properties caused by Mg or Zn doping of GaN films grown via radio-frequency magnetron sputtering using laboratory-prepared targets", by Erick Gastellóu, Godofredo García, Ana Maria Herrera, Crisoforo Morales, Rafael García, Gustavo Alonso Hirata, Enrique Rosendo, José Alberto Luna, Mario Robles, Jorge Alberto Rodríguez, and Yani Dallane Ramírez. We have implemented several changes in the text to answer all indications requested by the assistant editor. We believe that their observations allowed us to improve substantially the quality of our work, and hence we manifest our gratitude to the professional job they did in the review of our manuscript.
In the revised manuscript, the sentences underlined in yellow correspond to the corrections of the third reviewer; in addition to this, a thorough review of the manuscript was carried out taking into account the comments of the third reviewer.
Yours Sincerely
Dr. Erick Gastellóu
Corresponding author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
