Research on Tip Characterization Techniques Based on Two-Dimensional Self-Traceable Nano-Gratings
and Xinbin Cheng 1,2,3,4,5
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
overall good,
Before publication, consider performing a spelling check and making some stylistic adjustments to the English.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript “Research on Tip Characterization Techniques Based on Two-Dimensional self-traceable nano-gratings” by Y. Xiong et al. proposes experimentally mechanism by analyzing the periodic stability of the grating sample during scanning and corrected the lateral distortion of Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM). The manuscript builds up on first AFM measurement analyzing the periodic consistency during the scanning process of selective directions. They expanded their work further, characterized the tilt angles in the X and Y directions of the scanning tip of the grating sample. The authors provide a detailed study how the calibrated AFM’s tip characterization results for tip angles exhibit good consistency and maintained law error. I find the manuscript overall interesting and convincing. The experiments were well designed, detailed analysis is self-consistent and conducted to prove the concept. I would like to recommend acceptance of this manuscript after address the following minor issues.
1. The interesting tip’s Y-direction and X-direction AFM scanning direction measurements and analysis to emerge in 2D grating their width must be a) narrow and b) must be uniform. Though it’s hard to tell from the images showed in Figures 7 and 8, the surface of the holes is not smooth. What is the reason for this? not many presented the 2D grating here could be considered to be much below 500 nm.
2. In Figures 7 and 8, many of the grating and hole certainly have very non-uniform widths. That needs to be explained. Furthermore, taking three sampled profiles, with the average from the three to utilize accurately as a period values calibration within a scanning scales of 0.5 µm and 1 µm is not as such precise. However, in latter part of their analysis the authors use five tip profiles as a reference value. The author’s need to explain their limiting case of average of the results from each characterization point.
3. Could the authors explain why their scanning scale is limited scanning scales of 0.5 µm and 1 µm? Can it be applied to below 0.5 scale?
4. Since AFM scanning direction measurements is as a primary focus of the accuracy measurement of 2D grating is it possible to add other measures maybe TEM or SEM to show significance of the underlying mechanism of this work?
5. In page 10 the author states that “Sample preservation is an urgent issue to address. Given that the primary material of the grating sample is silicon it’s prone to oxidation when exposed to air. This results in the formation of an oxide film approximately 1-2 nm thick on the surface.” However, they did not include the oxidation of Chromium and formation of Chromium oxide layer. I recommend to discuss the briefly in the beginning. I believe significant oxidation level can directly influence scanning AFM measurements.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn this manuscript, a two-dimensional nano-grating sample with self-traceable properties was fabricated, based on which the authors characterized the scanning tip of atomic force microscope, and the article obtained relatively good characterization results. The article flows smoothly, the illustrations are well-crafted, the experimental design is reasonable, and the logic is clear. Minor revisions are recommended before it is accepted. The aspects that need to be revised are as follows.
1. The article does not clearly specify whether the grating deposition occurs on the Film surface or the substrate surface. Please make this distinction in the text for the benefit of readers, making it easier to understand.
2. The SEM image of the two-dimensional nano-grating in Figure 4 does not seem to play a prominent role in the article. It is recommended to consider removing it.
3. It is advisable to conduct a grammar and spelling check on the article before publication, along with making some adjustments to the English writing style.
4. The results of the characterization tip do not clearly represent the symmetry with respect to the tip center in the figures. Please consider modifying the schematic illustrations to better convey this information.
5. When calculating the calibration factor at a 1 μm scale, it is suggested to take multiple measurements in the vertical direction to calculate an average value. Focusing solely on a single contour may introduce larger errors.
6. The sizes of Figures 8 and 10 are inconsistent. It is recommended to make the necessary adjustments for consistency.
7. The "Materials and Methods" section has relatively few references cited. It is advisable to add more references to enrich the content of the article.
It is advisable to conduct a grammar and spelling check on the article before publication, along with making some adjustments to the English writing style.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
