Dicarbocyanine Dye-Based Organic Photodiodes
and Azzuliani Supangat 1,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Manuscript ID: photonics-2066791
Point 1: On Page 10, in Table 3, all data are indicated only one value. Is this meant that the authors performed only once? Or is it the average value or the highest value? Please specify experimental conditions that can be judged the data reliability.
Response 1: The data indicated in Table 3 is the average value obtained from experiments. To specify this, we added an error bar in Figures 4(a) and 4(b).
Point 2: Photovoltaic device generally have a cathode interface layer, which is conducive to improving the device performance. Why is there no cathode interface layer in the device structure you use? It is recommended that the authors should include the reference Opt. Mater. 2022, 129 ,112520., and add a short discussion as compared with similar work on the cathode interface layer.
Response 2: Initially, PEIE was used as a cathode interface layer in the device structure. The device shows a good response toward the light in dark conditions but an unstable response toward the light when the illumination of light is applied. Removing the PEIE layer caused more stable and reliable data that eventually lead us to fabricate a device with only an anode interface layer to prevent current leakage. Short discussions on the anode and cathode interface layer have been added on page 6.
Point 3: The correlation between the surface with higher roughness and donor - acceptor contact area is not absolute. For example, the surface with lower small roughness may also increase the donor-acceptor contact area,.Some literature reports (Energy Technol. 2022, 10, 2200504 and J. Mater. Chem. A, 2019, 7, 15841) should be included in the reference list
Response 3: The discussion has been improved (page 9) and the references have been included in the reference list.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear editors,
the manuscript seems to me suitable for publication. I have some minor report that authors can easy provide to correct. The format of references is not the MDPI format.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Manuscript ID: photonics-2066791
Point 1: Rows 12-13 – ‘The study on the characterization of 1′- 1’-diethyl-4,4′-dicarbocyanine iodide (DDCI-4) to 12 act as a photoactive material for organic photodiodes (OPDs) is reported’ It is no well written. I think that it is better writing ‘We report the study of 1′- 1’-diethyl-4,4′-dicarbocyanine iodide (DDCI-4) utilization as photoactive material for organic photodiodes (OPDs)’.
Response 1: Changes have been made on page 1 as suggested.
Point 2: Row 25-26. The reason that organic conjugated dyes have drown considerable attention are different. It is better to write ‘ The capability of conjugated organic dyes to aggregate in different modalities has drawn considerable attention.’
Response 2: Changes have been made on page 1 as suggested.
Point 3: Row 52-53 . ‘Which is good in light hgarvesting...’ ‘which can be utilized in light harvesting sensors.’
Response 3: Changes have been made on page 2 as suggested.
Point 4: Row 70. Are the energy levels in the figure 1c reported from literature data? In this case authors must report the references. In case the energies refer to the experimental data of the manuscript authors must specify it.
Response 4: Values obtained in Figure 1(c) are from this work which has been discussed on page 4.
Point 5: Row 300. DDCl-4 is not a new dye, it is also commercial. You can write ‘of a newly utilized conjugated dye- type material...’
Response 5: Changes have been made on page 9 as suggested.
Point 6: Format of reference are not in the MDPI style
Response 6: All the references have been updated to MDPI style.
Point 7: In the introduction authors should explain the feature of the ideal dye for photodiode and why DDCI-4
Response 7: Discussion on the ideal dye-based photodiode and DDCI-4 have been added on page 2.
Point 8: In the introduction the authors didn’t report if cyanine dyes, also different from DDCI-4, have been used as photodiodes. In case the cyanine dyes have never been use as photodiodes, authors should explain why they used specifically DDCI-4.
Response 8: An example of a good cyanine dye candidate for photodiode application such as Cy7-T has been proved and mentioned in this paper on pages 1 & 2.
Point 9: In the conclusions the authors should explain the contribute of DDCI-4 for the develop of photodiode, I mean they should explain the advantage of this dye respect the other previously used in this technology.
Response 9: The contribution of DDCI-4 towards photodiode performance was mostly due to Frenkel defect and delocalization of charges that happened at high concentrations of DDCI-4 and it has been mentioned in the conclusion. Compared to other cyanine dyes, the advantage of DDCI-4 is in terms of its stability in response to the device at ON and OFF states. The discussion has been updated on pages 8 & 9.
