Growth from the Melt and Properties Investigation of ScF3 Single Crystals
, Irina Buchinskaya 1, Natalia Arkharova 1, Pavel Prosekov 1, Vadim Grebenev 1, Nikolay Sorokin 1, Tatiana Glushkova 2 and Pavel Popov 3
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors described detailly crystal growth conditions, but I could not find in the paper a comparison between different crystal growth methods and prevalence of the proposed one. Please complete the deficiency in chapter 2.1. I can only guess that it is also the geometrical size. But how to compare quality (rocking curves) between the methods.
The Summary does not contain conclusions resulting from performed investigations. Please complete the deficiency.
When authors decide to present Table 1, they should also discuss the defect structure of the crystal. Some of them one can see in Fig. 5. It should be discussed bearing in mind a kind of defects.
Author Response
Comment 1
Authors described detailly crystal growth conditions, but I could not find in the paper a comparison between different crystal growth methods and prevalence of the proposed one. Please complete the deficiency in chapter 2.1. I can only guess that it is also the geometrical size. But how to compare quality (rocking curves) between the methods.
Reply 1
Thank you for your comments. Of course, it is advisable to add a comparison between different growth methods. But, there is small information about the methods of growth bulk ScF3 and the details of the growth process are not described, the quality of crystals has not been evaluated at all (only in terms of transparent, etc.), then we mainly compare the size of crystals. We have entered data on the geometric dimensions of crystals obtained by various methods, as well as information on rocking curves. It is not possible to compare rocking curves, as data from other authors are not available. The curve obtained by us will be successfully used for a comparative analysis after improving the quality of the crystals after annealing (similarly, for example, as described in the article https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.1016/S0925-3467(03)00115-0).
Comment 2
The Summary does not contain conclusions resulting from performed investigations. Please complete the deficiency.
Reply 2
We have radically revised section 4 and Summary. See manuscript main text
Comment 3
When authors decide to present Table 1, they should also discuss the defect structure of the crystal. Some of them one can see in Fig. 5. It should be discussed bearing in mind a kind of defects.
Reply 3
We took into account the comments and added a discussion of the data in Table 1. Relationship of impurities with the defect structure of the ScF3 crystal cannot be identified. We are simply stating the observed fact. Direct correlation can be observed only for the transmission spectra and the oxygen contamination in the crystals.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
Your work is perfectly suited for publication in Crystals. I would only have two points in order to ameliorate:
- You point the PDF file for ScF6. Actually, the structure itself is not defined in such a file (the atomic positions are not in, only a list of lines with cell parameters). You would prefer the Crystallography Open Database entries at http://www.crystallography.net/cod/index.php, please add the corresponding codes available for your phases
- Similarly, you should upload your physical properties at the Materials Properties Open Database at http://mpod.cimav.edu.mx, these will be very valuable to the community.
You will find on these sites the original articles to cite too.
Sincerely
Author Response
Comment 1
You point the PDF file for ScF6. Actually, the structure itself is not defined in such a file (the atomic positions are not in, only a list of lines with cell parameters). You would prefer the Crystallography Open Database entries at http://www.crystallography.net/cod/index.php, please add the corresponding codes available for your phases.
Reply 1
Thank you for appreciation of our article and your comments. Of course, you are right. We have entered the appropriate COD ID’s for these compounds.
Comment 2
Similarly, you should upload your physical properties at the Materials Properties Open Database at http://mpod.cimav.edu.mx, these will be very valuable to the community.
Reply 2
Thank you for this note. We will certainly do it after publishing this article.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors state that they first grew ScF3 single crystals from the melt by the Bridgman technique using a specially designed graphite crucible [40]. They studied a complex of physical properties, including electrical conductivity in a range of 350–650 K. However, the authors are silent about the fact that similar results were published in the journal Crystallography Reports. 2016. V. 61. No. 2. P. 270–274. The authors do not refer to this article. In the previously published paper, ScF3 single crystals were also grown from the melt by the Bridgman technique using a specially designed graphite crucible; electrical conductivity was also measured for the first time in the interval 363–832 K. Fig. 9 in submitted article is a part of Fig. 2 in the previously published article. It looks like plagiarism. How can authors explain this situation? The other results do not cause questions. The article should be redone taking into account the previously published work.
Article is written carelessly. ReO3: what is Re? Rhenium or rare earth? There is also the abbreviation REE in the text. A single designation should be used for the rare earth element. There are a lot of misprints in the text.
According to printed symbols for crystallographic items (International Tables for Crystallography (2006). Vol. A, Chapter 1.1, pp. 2–3.), hkl are indices of the Bragg reflection (Laue indices) from the set of parallel equidistant net planes (hkl); (hkl) are indices of a crystal face, or of a single net plane (Miller indices). So, reflections on Fig. 3 and in the text should be printed without brackets.
Who is the V.V. who performed the conductivity studies?
Authors should improve English, especially pay attention to punctuation.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
I read the revised version of the article. Now everything is all right. I'm satisfied. The article may be accepted for publication. Moderate English changes required.
