Next Article in Journal
With Blue Light against Biofilms: Berberine as Natural Photosensitizer for Photodynamic Inactivation of Human Pathogens
Previous Article in Journal
Enhanced Discrete Wavelet Transform–Non-Local Means for Multimode Fiber Optic Vibration Signal
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Tunable Radiation Patterns on Temperature-Dependent Materials

Photonics 2024, 11(7), 646; https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics11070646
by Lin Cheng 1,*, Fan Wu 2 and Kun Huang 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Photonics 2024, 11(7), 646; https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics11070646
Submission received: 11 June 2024 / Revised: 30 June 2024 / Accepted: 2 July 2024 / Published: 8 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Optoelectronics and Optical Materials)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors demonstrate theoretical and simulation work on temperature-controlled far-field radiation antenna using a designed disk of indium tin oxide and aluminum gallium nitride. The study addresses an interesting solution. The conclusions together with the presented results are consistent with the manuscript's arguments. In addition, the manuscript is well-written. 

I have the following minor comments for the authors, which may further improve the manuscript quality:

·        I suggest discussing more about the tune-ability speed of the antenna.

·        I suggest elaborating more on the possible methods to tune the radiation pattern (e.g. heating, light intensity, or altering voltage) and discussing its advantages/ disadvantages.

·        What about the influence of the Kerr effect on tuning the radiation pattern? Can you discuss that in one paragraph?

·        In Fig. 5, you mentioned “bottom illumination direction” for both cases.

·        In Fig. A4, I believe the red arrow direction does not match the top/ bottom illumination directions.

·        In the title, I believe the authors mean “dependent” not “Denpendent”.

Author Response

1. Summary

 

 

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files. 

 

2. Questions for General Evaluation

Reviewer’s Evaluation

Response and Revisions

Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?

Can be improved

We give our corresponding response in the point-by-point response letter.

Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

Can be improved

We give our corresponding response in the point-by-point response letter.

Is the research design appropriate?

Can be improved

We give our corresponding response in the point-by-point response letter.

Are the methods adequately described?

Can be improved

We give our corresponding response in the point-by-point response letter.

Are the results clearly presented?

Can be improved

We give our corresponding response in the point-by-point response letter.

Are the conclusions supported by the results?

Can be improved

We give our corresponding response in the point-by-point response letter.

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: I suggest discussing more about the tune-ability speed of the antenna.

Response 1: In page 1, line 33:”ENZ materials provide a new platform to optically tune the response of the material within a subpicosecond timescale[2].”

Comments 2: I suggest elaborating more on the possible methods to tune the radiation pattern (e.g. heating, light intensity, or altering voltage) and discussing its advantages/ disadvantages.

Response 2: Agree. We have, accordingly, done to emphasize this point.

In page 1 line 27:”Electric regulation has good compatibility and high efficiency, but its structure is complex; Light regulation is the fastest, but requires a light source, resulting in low efficiency.”

Comments 3: What about the influence of the Kerr effect on tuning the radiation pattern? Can you discuss that in one paragraph?

Response 3: I’m sorry about that, there is Kerr effect caused by hot electron nonlinearity. The Temperature-intensity is polynomial fitting[Physical Review Applied, 2019, 11, 064062.]. The Kerr effect can be described by The Kerr effect of the material plays a crucial role in changing the induced multipole moments, and thus drastically modifying its scattering, absorption, and extinction cross section as well as its radiation pattern.

In page 2, line 43:”The Kerr effect, caused by hot electron nonlinearity, plays a important role in changing the induced multipole moments, and thus drastically modulate its scattering, absorption and extinction as well as its far-field radiation patterns.”

Comments 4: In Fig. 5, you mentioned “bottom illumination direction” for both cases.

Response 4: We thank the referee for pointing out the shortcoming. We have rewrited the “bottom illumination ” and “top illumination” cases .

In Page7, line 168:. “(b1)-(b5)The radiation patterns for the top illumination direction”

Comments 5: In Fig. A4, I believe the red arrow direction does not match the top/ bottom illumination directions.

Response 5: We redo the electric distribution, Figs. A4(a)-(b) are the electric distribution from the bottom illumination at 298 K and 2000 K, respectively. Figs. A4(c)-(d) are the electric distribution from the top illumination at 298 K and 2000 K, respectively.

Comments 6: In the title, I believe the authors mean “dependent” not “Denpendent”.

Response 6: We have revised this point in the title “Tunable Radiation Patterns on the Temperature-Dependent Materials.”

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Response 4: In addition to the above modifications, we have further adjusted some mistakes in this articles, specifically as follows:

In page 6, line 136:More diverse changes in different dimensions are shown in Supplementary Material Fig. A3.

In Page 6, line 147:Here, the refractive index of Al0.18Ga0.82As is around 3.5.

5. Additional clarifications

Based on the referees’ suggestions and comments, we have revised the manuscript accordingly. We believe that this revised manuscript is now greatly improved and hope that the referees will be satisfied with our responses and revisions.

We hope that the revised manuscript can now be considered for publication on Photonics.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper "Tunable Radiation Patterns in Temperature-Dependent Materials" by Lin Cheng, Fan Wu, and Kun Huang focuses on the numerical study of how the scattering diagram of a hybrid (ITO/AlGaAs) nanodisk changes depending on temperature. It considers the ENZ regime of the ITO (indium tin oxide) in combination with the scattering properties of the AlGaAs nanodisk.

In my opinion, the article is not yet complete and needs significant major revision. It contains grammar mistakes. Some figures are not described in the text. Some sentences are repeated twice. There is no logic in some parts of the text. The paper needs to be significantly modified. Very major revisions are required. Below, please find my comments on the text:

  1. Page 1.  “…pulses with modulation speeds in the 100 s of femiseconds in graphene [10]…”. What means 100 s of femiseconds? Femiseconds should be written as “femtoseconds”. 
  2. Page 1. “… a broad transparency windwo ranging…” windwo should be written as “window”.
  3. Page 2: "The resonance of the ITO disk is weaker than that of the Al0.18Ga0.82As disk..." It is not clear what characteristic of the resonance is being referred to. Could you please specify which characteristic of the resonance is being compared?
  4. Page 2. "…, thereby engineering the far-field radiation effectively". "Effectively" should be used instead of "effectively".
  5. Page 6. “… investigated their optical characteristics under the opposite electric fields.” “Opposite electric field” means different orientation of the polarization.  However,  the direction of light is mentioned in the text. I believe this should be rephrased.
  6. Mistake  “a biaisotropic response” on Page 6.
  7. There are no ticks on the map in Figure 3(a).
  8. The heights of ITO and AlGaAs in the sketch of the disk (Figure 4(a)) are not proportional to the parameters used in the simulation. They should be redrawn. 
  9. There are no axes on the scattering diagrams in Figures 2(c1-c5) and 3(c1-c5), as well as in Figure 5 (a1-a5). This makes it difficult to link the descriptions in the text with the information presented in these figures. Could you please add axes to these diagrams?
  10. There are no references to the information presented in the appendix in the main body of the text.
  11. The caption for Figure A4 (in the appendix) describes the field distributions, but the axes of the graph are labeled as H(nm) and T. Is this a mistake?
  12. Appendix A2. Page 9. “Here, Periodic boundary conditions are employed along the x and y axes;” What period was used in the simulation?" The next question is, are the periodic boundary conditions also used in simulations of the extinction, scattering, and absorbtion cross-section for the AlGaAs disk and hybrid disk?
  13. Section 2. Materials and Methods: This section is not well-structured. The same points are repeated twice: “According to the optical properties of ITO as a function of electron temperature, the real and imaginary components of the refractive index at λENZ = 1240nm are shown by the blue lines in Fig. 1. The change in the real part of the refractive index with intensity is approximately 0.22, and the linear refractive index is 0.45.”    It is still unclear how Figure 1, which shows the refractive indices of ITO, was obtained. Was it taken from reference 14 or was it calculated using equation (1)? If the Fig. 1 (blue lines) was taken from Ref. 14, it should be explained how the intensity of the light was translated to the temperature. Ref. 13 does not provide information on the temperature dependence of the ITO's refractive index. It should also be noted at which temperature ENZ is reached for ITO.
  14. I was unable to locate the supplementary material and Fig. S2.
  15. Section 3. How will the presence of the substrate affect the scattering properties?
  16. Figure 2(a) shows that the scattering efficiency does not change significantly even though the refractive index of ITO changes significantly. This is interesting because it is expected that the wavelength of the electric dipole resonances shifts to a larger wavelength as the refractive index changes, which would cause a change in the scattering efficiency.
  17. There are no references or descriptions of Figures 2(c1-c5) in the text of the manuscript, and they should be added. Similarly, there are no references for Figure 3(b), (c1-c5), and it is unclear what disk diameter and height were used to simulate the scattering, absorption, and extinction cross-sections. If the disk has a diameter of 600 nm and a height of 150 nm, then please plot the dashed line in Figure 3(a). It is also unclear why the height to diameter ratio of 150:600 was used instead of other ratios.
  18. Figure 1(a) shows the real and imaginary parts of the refractive index for ITO at different temperatures. However, there is no information provided about the imaginary part for AlGaAs. The author has provided the Sellmeier equation for the real part of AlGaAs, but it is not clear if they used the imaginary part in their simulations. If not, it would be interesting to see how its inclusion would affect the scattering efficiency, as the imaginary part was considered for ITO in the simulation.
  19. Could you please clarify the difference between the scattering diagrams in Figures 3(c1-c5) for the AlGaAs disk and 5(a1-a5) for the hybrid disk? From my understanding, it seems that the scattering diagrams are not significantly altered when the ITO layer is added.  
Comments on the Quality of English Language

 The article contains grammar mistakes.

Author Response

Comments 1: Page 1.“…pulses with modulation speeds in the 100 s of femiseconds in graphene [10]…”. What means 100 s of femiseconds? Femiseconds should be written as “femtoseconds”.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. I/We agree with this comment.

In page 1, line 32:”100 femtosecondes”.

Comments 2: Page 1. “… a broad transparency windwo ranging…” windwo should be written as “window”.

Response 2: Thank you for point it out.

In page 1, line 36:”window”.

Comments 3: Page 2: "The resonance of the ITO disk is weaker than that of the Al0.18Ga0.82As disk..." It is not clear what characteristic of the resonance is being referred to. Could you please specify which characteristic of the resonance is being compared?

Response 3: In page 2 line 37:”The scattering response of ITO disk is weaker than that of Al0.18Ga0.82As with the same dimensions due to higher absorption losses of ITO.”

Comments 4: Page 2. "…, thereby engineering the far-field radiation effectively". "Effectively" should be used instead of "effectively".

Response 4: In page 2 line 47:”effectively”

Comments 5: Page 6. “… investigated their optical characteristics under the opposite electric fields.” “Opposite electric field” means different orientation of the polarization. However, the direction of light is mentioned in the text. I believe this should be rephrased.

Response 5: We rephrased this part.

In page 6, line 151:”when illuminated by an x-polarized plane wave propagating in two opposite directions, i.e., k=±k0ez

Comments 6: Mistake “a biaisotropic response” on Page 6.

Response 6: We delete “a” on Page 6.

In page 6, line 155:”the hybrid antenna demosntrates bianisotropic response.”

Comments 7: There are no ticks on the map in Figure 3(a).

Response 7: We add a tick in Fig.3(a) in page 5.

 

Fig.3

Comments 8: The heights of ITO and AlGaAs in the sketch of the disk (Figure 4(a)) are not proportional to the parameters used in the simulation. They should be redrawn.

Response 8: Here, we redo the simulations. The sketch of the disk is right, we changed the parameters in the text.

In page 6, line 150:”the height of ITO and Al0.18Ga0.82As are HITO=400 nm and HAl0.18Ga0.82As=150 nm, respectively.”

Comments 9: There are no axes on the scattering diagrams in Figures 2(c1-c5) and 3(c1-c5), as well as in Figure 5 (a1-a5). This makes it difficult to link the descriptions in the text with the information presented in these figures. Could you please add axes to these diagrams?

Response 9: Thanks for your suggestion. We add the axes in Fig.2(c1), 3(c1) and 5(c1):

 

Fig.2

 

Fig.3

 

Fig.5

Comments 10: There are no references to the information presented in the appendix in the main body of the text.

Response 10: We add the references to the information presented in the appendix in the mian body.

In page 5, line 126:”As the height of ITO increases at D=200 nm and D=1000 nm, the scattering, absorption and extinction cross section can be found in Fig.A1(a)-(b), respectively. The corresponding multipole decomposition are sown in Fig.A1(c)-(d) [see Appendix A.2].”

In page 6 line 139:”More diverse changes in different dimensions are shown in Fig. A3 [see Appendix A.3]. ”

In page 7, line 171:”The electric field distribution for opposite illuminations are shown in Fig. A4 [see Appendix A.4].”

Comments 11: The caption for Figure A4 (in the appendix) describes the field distributions, but the axes of the graph are labeled as H(nm) and T. Is this a mistake?

Response 11: Thanks for you point this out. We revise the x axis as “D (nm)” in Fig. A4.

In page 10, Fig. A4

 

Comments 12: Appendix A2. Page 9. “Here, Periodic boundary conditions are employed along the x and y axes;” What period was used in the simulation?" The next question is, are the periodic boundary conditions also used in simulations of the extinction, scattering, and absorbtion cross-section for the AlGaAs disk and hybrid disk?

Response 12: For the simulation of scattering cross section, one should employ the PML along the x,y and z axes. We made a mistake in previous version, so we changed this part.

In page 9, line 228:”Here, perfectly matched layer (PML) are empolyed along the x, y and z axes.” 

Comments 13: Section 2. Materials and Methods: This section is not well-structured. The same points are repeated twice: “According to the optical properties of ITO as a function of electron temperature, the real and imaginary components of the refractive index at λENZ = 1240nm are shown by the blue lines in Fig. 1. The change in the real part of the refractive index with intensity is approximately 0.22, and the linear refractive index is 0.45.” It is still unclear how Figure 1, which shows the refractive indices of ITO, was obtained. Was it taken from reference 14 or was it calculated using equation (1)? If the Fig. 1 (blue lines) was taken from Ref. 14, it should be explained how the intensity of the light was translated to the temperature. Ref. 13 does not provide information on the temperature dependence of the ITO's refractive index. It should also be noted at which temperature ENZ is reached for ITO.

Response 13: The refractive index of ITO changes as the temperature can be obtained in Ref. 15 calculated by Eq.(1). In Ref.16, the dependence of wp and r on pump intensity (Ip) are studied for the nonlinear response. The electron effective mass defined could accurately predict the temperature-dependent free electron effective mass.

 Temperature-intensity (T-) I is the polynomial fitting that can be found in Fig.3(e) in Ref. 16. The ENZ wavelengt is measured at room temperature[Science 2016, 352, 795–797.].

Comments 14: I was unable to locate the supplementary material and Fig. S2.

Response 14: I’m sorry about that we made a mistake.

In page 6, line 136:”More diverse changes in different dimensions are shown in Fig. A3 [see Appendix A.3].”

Comments 15: Section 3. How will the presence of the substrate affect the scattering properties?

Response 15: In fact, the substrate can affect the radiation pattern due to the electric and magnetic responses. Usually, one will study the transmission, reflection and abosrption instead of the scattering cross section with substrate which also caused by the multipole response [Journal of Physics D:Applied Physics, 2017, 50,503002.].

Comments 16: Figure 2(a) shows that the scattering efficiency does not change significantly even though the refractive index of ITO changes significantly. This is interesting because it is expected that the wavelength of the electric dipole resonances shifts to a larger wavelength as the refractive index changes, which would cause a change in the scattering efficiency.

Response 16: The change of refractive index of ITO cause the variation of scattering efficiency. However, the refractive index is approching the backgroud index, the variation changed not significantly. If the background material set larger than the 1, the scattering efficiency can be found larger than that in the paper. That is why the change of refractive index of Al0.18Ga0.82As is 0.22 as well, the scattering efficiency changes significantly in Fig.3.

Comments 17: There are no references or descriptions of Figures 2(c1-c5) in the text of the manuscript, and they should be added. Similarly, there are no references for Figure 3(b), (c1-c5), and it is unclear what disk diameter and height were used to simulate the scattering, absorption, and extinction cross-sections. If the disk has a diameter of 600 nm and a height of 150 nm, then please plot the dashed line in Figure 3(a). It is also unclear why the height to diameter ratio of 150:600 was used instead of other ratios.

Response 17: In page 5, line 120: “These variations are due to the contributions of multipoles, which remain relatively constant and exhibit an almost unchanged far-field radiation pattern, as illustrated in Figs. 2(c1)-(c2).”

In page 6, line 135:”Taking D = 600 nm and H = 150 nm as an example as shown in Fig.3(b)”.

In page 6, line 137, “In Fig. 3(b), when...”

In page 6, line 145, “In Figs. 3(c1)-(c5), the radiation ...”.

In page 5, Fig6, we redrawn the Fig.3(a) and marked the “D=600, H=150 nm”.

 

Comments 18: Figure 1(a) shows the real and imaginary parts of the refractive index for ITO at different temperatures. However, there is no information provided about the imaginary part for AlGaAs. The author has provided the Sellmeier equation for the real part of AlGaAs, but it is not clear if they used the imaginary part in their simulations. If not, it would be interesting to see how its inclusion would affect the scattering efficiency, as the imaginary part was considered for ITO in the simulation.

Response 18: The AlGaAs is the lossless material. As a losslessmaterial, dielectric antennas support strong electric and magnetic responses with large scattering cross sections[Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particle, John Wiley & Sons, 2008; Nano Letters, 2012,12,3749-3755; Scietific Reports, 2012,2,492.].

In page 5, line 132:”As a lossless dielectric, there is no imaginary part of Al0.18Ga0.72As at 1240 nm.” 

Comments 19: Could you please clarify the difference between the scattering diagrams in Figures 3(c1-c5) for the AlGaAs disk and 5(a1-a5) for the hybrid disk? From my understanding, it seems that the scattering diagrams are not significantly altered when the ITO layer is added.

Response 19: Yes, you are right. We utility the hybrid structure, because the ITO suffers from losses and combines with AlGaAs to form a hybrid structure, which allows for switching between scattering and absorption. On the other hand, this structure will cause bianisotropic response. With the change of temperature, the refractive index range of these two materials is almost the same between 298 K-2000K, which makes the hybrid structure promising for designing different devices in different dielectric background materials.

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Response 1: We changed some grammar mistakes marked in blue word in the revised manuscript.

In page 2, line 62:”The change in the real part of the refractive index with temperature is approximately 0.22, and the linear refractive index is 0.45.”

In page 2, line 59:”Refractive indices of ITO and Al0.18Ga0.82As as a function of temperature...”

In page 5 line 121:”in Figs.2(c1)-(c5)”

In page 6 line 139:”in different dimensions”

In page 6 line 150:”Here, the refractive index of Al0.18Ga0.82As is around 3.5”

5. Additional clarifications

Based on the referees’ suggestions and comments, we have revised the manuscript accordingly. We believe that this revised manuscript is now greatly improved and hope that the referees will be satisfied with our responses and revisions.

We hope that the revised manuscript can now be considered for publication on Photonics.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is an interesting theoretical study. I think that it is interesting enough to warrant eventual publication. I would like only to point out that the authors sometimes are overly theoretical. For example, they plot the refractive index up to 2000 K. Well, Al0.18Ga0.82As melts around 1520 K, ITO melts around 1800 K.    Also, one might say that the Sellmeier equation as derived in Ref.[16] of the manuscript was described  by the authors of the Ref.[16] as valid up to 359 K with "possible extrapolations". But the authors of the current manuscript boldly declare that  "This Sellmeier can be used at 1240 nm and 2000 K [16]." This is  a bit long-winded  extrapolation. 

I would advise the authors for the sanity sake keeping to lower temperatures, say, 1500 K.  It would not harm also to polish the style. Such statements as " However, the absorption cross section of ITO disk remains evident" tend to induce confusion. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

It should be improved.  

Author Response

Coments1: I would advise the authors for the sanity sake keeping to lower temperatures, say, 1500 K.

Response1: The temperature in this paper is the electron temperature, and it is the lattice temperature that causes the material to melt. The specific heat capacity of electrons is much smaller than that of the lattice, so it is easy for lasers to reach several thousand K, but the energy transferred to the lattice may only vary by a few degrees. Similarly, if a laser is used to incident materials, femtosecond pulses only have strong light, low pulse energy, and minimal thermal effects.

Coments2: However, the absorption cross section of ITO disk remains evident" tend to induce confusion.

Response2:  We delete this sentence in page 2 line 41.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have significantly improved the text and the quality of the materials presented. However, there are several questions and comments that need to be addressed before publication in Photonics:

1.        Page 1. Line 7:
“In the proposed design, a frequency is achieved at the epsilon-near-zero wavelength of 1240 nm. “
For me, this sentence sounds strange. Maybe it was meant to say that the epsilon-near-zero regime is reached at 1240 nanometers?

2.        Page 5. Line 135  Typo “ … are sown”.

3.        Page 9. Line 228. Typo “ … (PML) are empolyed…”should be “…is employed”

4.        Page 5. Line 140. Typo: “…at 1240 /,nm”

5.        It is still not possible to clearly see the ticks in Figure 3(a), and it is difficult to link the numbers to the axes. This was mentioned in the previous review as comment number 7.

6.        Figure A4.  Please indicate whether an electric or magnetic field is present in the field distribution.

7.        Could you please explain in the text why a height to diameter ratio of 150/600 was chosen and not another ratio (Figure 3(a))? This ratio seems to provide a higher minimum extinction cross-section compared to, for example, values of H/D close to 1 (this was part of my comment number 16 in the previous review).

8. Regarding previous comment 19 and your response, could you please clarify in the text the temperature and direction of light that enable switching between the absorption and scattering regimes in the case of the hybrid antenna? I have still not found these two regimes mentioned in the text.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Some typos need to be corrected (please see comments 1-4).

Author Response

Comments 1: Page 1. Line 7:“In the proposed design, a frequency is achieved at the epsilon-near-zero wavelength of 1240 nm. “ For me, this sentence sounds strange. Maybe it was meant to say that the epsilon-near-zero regime is reached at 1240 nanometers?

Response 1: Thanks for you pointing this out. “The epsilon-near-zeo regime of ITO is reached at 1240 nm” This sentence is more accurate.

In page 1, line 7”at the wavelength of 1240 nm”.

In page 2 line 68:”Here, the epsilon-near-zeo regime of ITO is reached at 1240 nm”

Comments 2: Page 5. Line 135 Typo “ … are sown”.

Response 2: Thank you. “sown” should be “shown”.

In page 5 line 132:”are shown.”

Comments 3: Page 9. Line 228. Typo “ … (PML) are empolyed…”should be “…is employed”

Response 3:  In page 9 line 238, “is”

Comments 4: Page 5. Line 140. Typo: “…at 1240 /,nm.

Response 4: In page 6, line 137 : we delete ”/,” 

Comments 5: It is still not possible to clearly see the ticks in Figure 3(a), and it is difficult to link the numbers to the axes. This was mentioned in the previous review as comment number 7.

Response 5: We add ticks in Fig. 3(a).

 

Comments 6: Figure A4. Please indicate whether an electric or magnetic field is present in the field distribution.

Response 6: In page 10, 244 : we add ”electric” under the Fig.A4.

Comments 7: Could you please explain in the text why a height to diameter ratio of 150/600 was chosen and not another ratio (Figure 3(a))?This ratio seems to provide a higher minimum extinction cross-section compared to, or example, values of H/D close to 1 (this was part of my comment number 16 in the previous review).

16 Figure 2(a) shows that the scattering efficiency does not change significantly even though the refractive index of ITO changes significantly. This is interesting because it is expected that the wavelength of the electric dipole resonances shifts to a larger wavelength as the refractive index changes, which would cause a change in the scattering efficiency.

Response 7: In Fig.A3, it can be seen that with the increase of H, the trend of the scattering cross section is different. We have drawn a scattering cross section of H=50 to 600 nm, and we can see from the Fig. A3 that when H=150 nm, the contribution of the multipole changes more than that when H=50 and 100 nm, and the drastic change of the multipole can cause abundant far-field radiation phenomena, so we chose this height. In addition to this height, it can be seen from the diagram that there are more interesting phenomena in other heights, which are not described here by diagram. Only a small size was taken and placed here as a representative figure.

 

Response 16: In this paper, we only study the scattering cross section at the wavelength of 1240, the efficiency changes as refractive index at different temperature. The scattering efficiency is affected by the refractive index of ITO which is close to the air.

 

I’m sorry I may not be too clear about your question, but I hope this answer is useful.

 

In page 6 line 141:”In Fig.A3, it can be seen that with the increase of H, the trend of the scattering cross section is different. We have drawn a scattering cross section of H=50 to 600 nm, and we can see from the Fig. A3 that when H=150 nm, the contribution of the multipole changes more than that when H=50 and 100 nm, and the drastic change of the multipole can cause abundant far-field radiation phenomena, so we take D=600 nm and H=150 nm as an example as shown in Figs.3(b)}.”

In addition, we add the far-field radiation patterns in Fig. A4 in Appendix as well.

 

In page 11, line 263:“As can be seen from Fig.A3(l), when both diameter D and H of Ga0.18Al0.82As are 600 nm, the contribution of electric quadrupole and magnetic dipole is similar at T=899 K, and the electric quadrupole is dominant when it is less than 899 K, and the magnetic dipole is dominant when it is greater than 899K. The far-field radiation is unevenly distributed on both sides of the y-axis and z-axis at room temperature as shown in Fig.A4(a1), and with the increase of temperature, the four-lobe radiation pattern becomes nearly uniform in all four directions as seen in Fig.A4(a2). As the temperature continues to increase, and the radiation angle in the XZ plane gradually decreases as shown in Fig.A4(a3)-(a5).”

Comments 8: Regarding previous comment 19 and your response, could you please clarify in the text the temperature and direction of light that enable switching between the absorption and scattering regimes in the case of the hybrid antenna? I have still not found these two regimes mentioned in the text.

Comments 19 Could you please clarify the difference between the scattering diagrams in Figures 3(c1-c5) for the AlGaAs disk and 5(a1-a5) for the hybrid disk? From my understanding, it seems that the scattering diagrams are not significantly altered when the ITO layer is added.

Response 8: In fact, we only emphasize the bianisotropic response in our manusicipt. Combined with the switching relationship between absorption and scattering of ITO [ACS Photonics, 2021, 8, 585-591] and the scattering characteristics of Ga0.18Al0.82As at D = 600 nm, H = 150 nm, the switching between absorption and scattering can be realized. However, this point is not emphasized in our article, nor is it given, and we can also use this as a starting point to do research work in the future.

Additionaly, with the change of temperature, the refractive index range of these two materials is almost the same between 298 K-2000K, which makes the hybrid structure promising for designing different devices in different dielectric background materials.

In page 8 line 204: we delete the sentence”This structure capitalizes 204
on the temperature-induced loss in ITO to achieve switching between absorption and 205
scattering, while also leveraging the strong scattering characteristics resulting from the 206
high refractive index of Al0.18Ga0.82As.”

In page 8, line 207: We changed the wrong sentence as ”The temperature adjustments induce diverse far field radiation distributions and has bianisotropic response.”

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

None

5. Additional clarifications

Based on the referees’ suggestions and comments, we have revised the manuscript accordingly. We believe that this revised manuscript is now greatly improved and hope that the referees will be satisfied with our responses and revisions.

We hope that the revised manuscript can now be considered for publication on Photonics.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop