2/4/2018 Review Form Response
http://aij.batan.go.id/index.php/aij/sectionEditor/viewReviewFormResponse/781/707 1/2
REVIEW FORM RESPONSE
Editor's Report .
1. Title * Appropriate Should be changed 2. Abstract
Is the length reasonable? * Yes
No
Is it an appropriate summary of the content? * Yes
No 3. Main Text
Is there anything new in this work? * Yes
No
Is the relation to previous studies adequately stated? * Yes
No
Are the assumption(s) and/or method(s) described comprehensively? * Yes
No
Are the new results adequately emphasized? * Yes
No
Referee's Comments
2/4/2018 Review Form Response
http://aij.batan.go.id/index.php/aij/sectionEditor/viewReviewFormResponse/781/707 2/2
This is good experimental work, but there is a problem: the work is a repeat of previous work by different authors. Reference 11 does the same measurement at x=0.05 and the uncited reference by these same authors, I.O. Troyanchuk et al. JETP Letters 93 (2011) 139, gives results for x=0.12.
The authors just publish their experimental results without discussing their context or implications. I believe that it is impossible for a microscopically homogeneous material to show both long range antiferromagnetic order and short range ferromagnetic clusters. This can only come about if there are microscopic inhomogeneities in the crystal. Thus the defects must not be random, but must show some clustering. Further the antiferromagnetic Bragg peaks at x=0.06 (figure 2(a)) show a much more gradual transition than is usual, suggesting either a magnetic critical index beta of about 0.5 or (more likely) regions with Neel temperature varying from 210K to about half that
temperature. Reference 11 shows a more normal temperature dependence, supporting the latter possibility. The uncited work by Troyanchuk et al. for x=0.12 shows a gradual phase separation below 200K, which is not surprising when coexistent ferromagnetism and anti ferromagnetic regions are reported. Surprisingly the powder pattern in figure 3(b) shows no sign of this. Probably this is due to different annealing times or cooling rates.
It is interesting that reference 9 and 17 both show that at x=0.25 there is long range
antiferromagnetic order coexistent which short range ferromagnetic clusters. Why are the results at x=0.06 and at x=0.25 similar while the results at in-between values of x (x=0.12 and 0.15) are different?
Final
Final comments and recommendations: *
Please answer the referee's report, and revise the paper accordingly.
The table has to be revised without vertical lines.
This Paper is recommended to be * Accepted without further revision Accepted with minor revision Major Revision is required Rejected
Close
* Denotes required field
