Cathodoluminescence Characterization of Point Defects Generated through Ion Implantations in 4H-SiC
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Ion implantations of the 4H-SiC samples led to the generation of silicon vacancies. cathodoluminescence was used to characterize the silicon vacancies. It was an interesting experimental work, some comments:
1) It is said that a peak related to the PL5 or PL6 310 defects was detected and related to the stacking faults, can you supply more relationshiop about the defects and stacking faults?
2)Higher temperature annealing should be done in future works to determine the possible recombination of defects after ion implantation. can you give some advice about high temperature annealing?
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper entitled ‘Cathodoluminescence characterization of point defects generated by ion implantations in 4H-SiC’ reported the zero phonon lines of silicon vacancies and divacancies in 4H-SiC after ion-implantation and annealing. I recommend the paper to be published in Coatings after moderate revisions.
1. The authors are recommended to confirm the off-axis angle of the 4H-SiC samples. The common angle is 4°.
2. In Table 2, the ZPLs of 856 nm and 862 nm are both attributed to silicon vacancies at the h site. After thermal annealing, the relative intensity between V1 and V1’ changes. I recommend the authors reconsider the point defect of V1 and V1’. Theoretically, VSi at the h site has unique defect configuration, and thus unique ZPL value. Why the single defect has two ZPL values? And the ZPL values even change after annealing?
3. The authors found the PL intensity of PL4 (VCVSi-hk) has linear dependence to that of V1 (VSi) in 4H-SiC. Please explain the reason.
4. The authors found the amount of VSi in Al-implanted 4H-SiC is lower. Why? Does it relate to the doping (and thus Fermi energy) of 4H-SiC?
The manuscript should be polished, corrections include but not limited to:
ion implantation of nitrogen or (and) aluminum
Figure 2 should be arranged as a scientific figure, blue highlighted a) and b) looks weird
By looking at Figure 4....
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
line 109/110: Cry-omodul should be Cryo-module
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
Although this topic is of some interest, this manuscript in its present form cannot be recommended for publication and requires some improvement and clarification.
1. The authors should explain the mechanism of cathodoluminescence excitation in more detail. It is believed that electron irradiation creates electron-hole pairs with their subsequent recombination at defects or dopants. The only question is what is captured first, an electron followed by hole recombination, or vice versa. This technique is classical, for example, for scintillator materials: Popov, A. I., Chernov, S. A., & Trinkler, L. E. (1997). Time-resolved luminescence of CsI-Tl crystals excited by pulsed electron beam. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 122(3), 602-605.
2. Did the authors observe any effects associated with aging and energy storage, with later can be recovered by light/heat?
3. What differences are observed when comparing the obtained results with other modifications of SiC. Even such a short analysis would be useful for those who are interested in all modifications and will attract more people.
Huczko, A., Dąbrowska, A., et al. Silicon carbide nanowires: synthesis and cathodoluminescence. physica status solidi (b), 2009, 246(11‐12), 2806-2808. https://doi.org/10.1002/pssb.200982321
Ottaviani, L., Hidalgo, P., et al (2003). Structural characterization of 6H-and 4H-SiC polytypes by means of cathodoluminescence and x-ray topography. Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 2003, 16(2), S107.
https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/16/2/013
In general, the manuscript is interesting and can be considered for publication after constructive reflection on the above comments.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I recommend the manuscript being accepted in the current form.
