A Review of Optical Tweezers with Metasurfaces

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In their manuscript, the authors review the current progress in metasurface devices for optical manipulations of nanoparticles. It believe the authors cover all the essential aspects of this rapidly developing field. Importantly, this review article covers all the relevant literature, including works published in 2022.

I would, however, suggest some improvements:

- Eq. 2: I suggest to write both "1/2" as a fraction, as this is done in Eq. 3

- "Generally, particles are attracted to and trapped at the at the position with the highest light intensity." This is true for nanoparticles but not for example for atoms, where it matters whether the light is red or blue detuned.

- line 146: p is the mode index of what?

- line 203: "less than 4 seconds". I think the meaning is not correct, it should be written "in less than 4 s".

- line 234: "in the micro level". What exactly do you mean by the micro level?

- In general there is no discussion about the possible range of optical tweezer beamwaists that can be achieved using metasurfaces. Are there any limitations?

- line 236: what do you mean by excellent trapping depth?

- line 300: "The upper two rows are the cases of LCP incidence, and the particles were trapped at the light spot." This is not correct!

- line 301: "The lower two rows are the cases of RCP incidence, and the particles rotated along the halo." This is also not correct!

- line 319: "Wang et al. developed a novel plasmonic OT based..." There is no explanation, what plasmonic OT are.

- line 408: The figure caption doesn't tell much. Why it is not simply written that the position of focus changes with the rotation of the polarisation?

- line 418: Please explain what is coherent control/illumination.

Typos:

- abstract: hypersurface?

- Introduction: [5][6]

- line 91: small p?

- line 104: superscript => prime

- line 166: we introduced = we introduce?

- line 169: metasuirface

- line 184: As Fig. 1 (c)show

- line 199: 30mW => 30 mW

- line 206: (f)??

- line 208: et al. should be italics?

- line 218: 170nm => 170 nm

- line 255: metasurfacecs

- line 263: vectors.Particles

- line 288: 5(d)shows.

- line 314: strctured

- line 337: the possible

- line 378: metasruface

- line 414: Fig.10(b) ??

- line 422: "are s are"

- line 612: "ability. in general."

Introduction: the phrases "such as", "such a" appear too often.

The use of word "scholars", which appears on many places, is a little weird to me.

There are many incorrect, incomplete or incomprehensible sentences. Here are few examples:

- line 31: ...have been developed more complex optical devices are needed to...

- line 38: ... and other fields where require enough power. 

- line 68: Finally, the special near-field metasurface OTs were mentioned. Why "were mentioned"?

- line 243: "Meanwhile, metasurface can be directly produced by chip production process, which is also conducive to the application of OTs with metasurfaces on chip." I don't understand the sentende

- line 290: A halo was observed while the right-handed circularly 290 polarized beam (RCP) was incident, and the function of OS were obtained.

- line 340: "The unique application of such structural beam is still to be explored."

- line 504: "and better participate in research." ??

- line 596: "Although there are still some defects to be overcome..."

- line 613: "These all advantages..."

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors of the paper “A review of optical tweezers with metasurfaces” have presented the current development of the optical tweezers with metasurface. They classified the hypersurface optical tweezers and summarized the new impetus brought by metasurface for the development of optical tweezers.

The subject of the paper is interesting and useful. I recommend to publish this paper after several changes.

1). In the INTODUCTION I recommend to say more words emphasizing difference between gradient force and scattering force.

2). The references before relations (1)-(9) have to be added.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Please see attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have taken into account all of my comments and made substantial improvements to the manuscript. I believe it is now suitable for publication.

I would still recommend minor editing by a native speaker to improve the English language.