Metal Halide Perovskite Light-Emitting Transistor with Tunable Emission Based on Electrically Doped Semiconductor Nanocrystal-Based Microcavities

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

As a communication can be printed without revisions.

Author Response

I appreciate the evaluation of the reviewer. I am very thankful.

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is too short for a scientific publication, even a communication. The author must provide more details, including schematics and mechanism of action for the liquid crystal, etc. No detail was provided for any structural consideration. Most concepts must be explained or visualized.

English is acceptable, except for a few words omitted, thus leading to a lack of clarity or meaning in some sentences.

Author Response

I thank the referee for the comment. I have proofread the manuscript. The corrections are highlighted in red.

Reviewer 3 Report

The submission presents (in a very short and concise manner) a conventional simulation of a multi-layer structure containing a transistor in architecture based on a perovskite semiconductor integrated with a cavity. Some tunability of the device has been demonstrated in numerical model and concluded. The simulator used is, however,  not described, but only named as the transfer matrix method. This is the most important shortcoming of this work. While the result of a modeling simulation would be interesting, a microscopic insight into the physical phenomena in the system under study is much more important. Otherwise, the analysis presented is the behavior of the simulator rather than the actual physical system. This should be revised and a more detailed discussion of transport microscopic effects in the considered system and simulator should be added. The standard Drude model for optical response is used along with other simplifications. Therefore, the presented results are only a demonstration of the simulator's variability parameters.

It is known that such conventional models of transport and associated optical response are sensitive to the deepening of physical insight - such as applying a quantum approach (usually of the Fermi golden rule type) - which can strongly influence conventional models (as for example in quantum nanoplasmonics, cf. Quantum Nano-Plasmonics, Cambridge 2020, by W. Jacak, or some quantum effects in perovskite-based microsystems, e.g., M. Laska et al. Nano Energy 75 (2020) 104751). The proposed presentation of the adopted physical model for simulation would be an opportunity to discuss or even only indicate similar quantum effects in the considered system and to increase the scientific value of the submission.

Therefore, a physical discussion of the model under consideration is recommended before making a final decision.

Author Response

The submission presents (in a very short and concise manner) a conventional simulation of a multi-layer structure containing a transistor in architecture based on a perovskite semiconductor integrated with a cavity. Some tunability of the device has been demonstrated in numerical model and concluded. The simulator used is, however,  not described, but only named as the transfer matrix method. This is the most important shortcoming of this work. While the result of a modeling simulation would be interesting, a microscopic insight into the physical phenomena in the system under study is much more important. Otherwise, the analysis presented is the behavior of the simulator rather than the actual physical system. This should be revised and a more detailed discussion of transport microscopic effects in the considered system and simulator should be added. The standard Drude model for optical response is used along with other simplifications. Therefore, the presented results are only a demonstration of the simulator's variability parameters.

It is known that such conventional models of transport and associated optical response are sensitive to the deepening of physical insight - such as applying a quantum approach (usually of the Fermi golden rule type) - which can strongly influence conventional models (as for example in quantum nanoplasmonics, cf. Quantum Nano-Plasmonics, Cambridge 2020, by W. Jacak, or some quantum effects in perovskite-based microsystems, e.g., M. Laska et al. Nano Energy 75 (2020) 104751). The proposed presentation of the adopted physical model for simulation would be an opportunity to discuss or even only indicate similar quantum effects in the considered system and to increase the scientific value of the submission.

Therefore, a physical discussion of the model under consideration is recommended before making a final decision.

 

Answer: I am really thankful for the this valuable comment of the reviewer. I agree that, as highlighted by the reviewer, a microscopic insight into the physical phenomena in the system under study is much more important. I would like to stress that in this work a close contact between the metal halide perovskite and the plasmonic materials is not occurring. As depicted in Figure 1, between the MaPbI₃ layer and the fluorine indium codoped cadmium oxide (FICO) there is a layer of silicon dioxide. Although, I think the suggestion of the reviewer is absolutely valuable and I have added the two suggested references in the manuscript. Moreover, I have added the following text (marked in red) in the manuscript:

 

“An extension of this work could take into account an improvement in the performance, in terms of electroluminescence, of the light-emitting transistor through direct contact between a plasmonic material and the emitting material in the transistor, i.e., metal halide perovskite in this work. To study this possible improvement in transistor performance, very precise microscopic theories have been proposed for similar devices [31,32]. Such microscopic theories would allow the device and its characteristics to be studied with great accuracy.”

Reviewer 4 Report

There are several issues here that need to be analysed and explained by the authors.

1. In figure 1, is the white blank layer a space layer or some other material. What is the approximate thickness?

2. For the light emitting device, the power and efficiency diagram of the overall device light emission also needs to be given.

3. there is a mistake in the title of the article, actually the work in this paper is to adjust the dielectric carrier concentration of gate to change the luminescence. Instead, the title can be misinterpreted as referencing semiconductor nanocrystals into perovskite light emitting devices.

4. Please give the voltage vs carrier density figures.

 

The descriptions in the text are often misleading and inappropriate and need to be reworked.

Author Response

Reviewer 4

There are several issues here that need to be analysed and explained by the authors.

 

1. In figure 1, is the white blank layer a space layer or some other material. What is the approximate thickness?

 

Answer: I thank the reviewer for the comment and I apologize for the figure caption that does fully explain the figure. the white spaces in the photonic crystal represent the repetition of the TiO₂/FICO unit cell, since each photonic crystal is made by 4 bilayers (and each bilayer corresponds to a unit cell of the crystal).

 

I have added in the manuscript the following text:

 

“The design of the device follows the sequence (from bottom to top) is ITO/(TiO₂/FICO)₄/SiO₂/MAPbI₃/SiO₂/ITO/(FICO/TiO₂)₄/ITO. In Figure 1, the white spaces in the photonic crystal represent the repetition of the TiO₂/FICO unit cell.”

 

And I have revised the figure caption adding the following text:

 

“The sequence of the structure (from bottom to top) is ITO/(TiO₂/FICO)₄/SiO₂/MAPbI₃/SiO₂/ITO/(FICO/TiO₂)₄/ITO. The white spaces in the photonic crystal represent the repetition of the TiO₂/FICO unit cell.”

 

2. For the light emitting device, the power and efficiency diagram of the overall device light emission also needs to be given.

 

Answer: I thank the reviewer for this point. A direct correlation between the external voltage and the electroluminescence shift in the light emitting transistor could be cumbersome. The previous results on a similar structure reported by Moscardi et al. (JMCC 2020, reference 30 in the manuscript) can help to give an estimate. I added the sentence:

 

“Taking into account the aforementioned result for a similar photonic structure reported in Ref. [30], the EL shift (in nm) over the external voltage (in V) can be estimated for this transistor and the value is about 2 nm/V.”

 

3. there is a mistake in the title of the article, actually the work in this paper is to adjust the dielectric carrier concentration of gate to change the luminescence. Instead, the title can be misinterpreted as referencing semiconductor nanocrystals into perovskite light emitting devices.

 

Answer: I thank the reviewer for this point. I have changed the title in the following way: “Metal halide perovskite light emitting transistor with tunable emission based on electrically doped semiconductor nanocrystal based microcavities.”

 

4. Please give the voltage vs carrier density figures.

English: The descriptions in the text are often misleading and inappropriate and need to be reworked.

 

Answer: I thank the reviewer for this comment. I have proofread the manuscript and the corrections are made in red along the manuscript.

All the revisions in the manuscript are marked in red.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The author addressed all the reviewer's concerns. 

Reviewer 3 Report

The Author has made some corrections. However, he is probably unable to develop the discussion of the model on a microscopic level. Therefore the submission is still only a report of a simulation. As I have commented previously, such a simulation might be published with, at least, mentioning on some more detailed microscopic issues, if not developed them detaily. The author has added some phrases of that type, so after final proofreading the submission can be published as short report of the simulation. 

only final proogreading would be of order