论文标题
对评论的回应（新型二维多孔石墨氮化碳C6N7单层：第一原则计算[Appl。Phys。2021，119，142102]）
Response to Comment on (Novel two-dimensional porous graphitic carbon nitride C6N7 monolayer: A First-principle calculations [Appl. Phys. Lett. 2021, 119, 142102])
论文作者
论文摘要
最近，报告了对我们的论文的评论[应用。物理。 Lett。 119，142102（2021）]。通过我们的回应，APL期刊拒绝了他们的非科学评论。关于他们的主张有一些歧义：1-他们可以检查其结构的声子分散，以查看ZA的平面外模式。 2他们报告了图2中的单轴应力应变反应，这与我们的论文无关。为了对新型C6N7单层的机械性能有更有益的了解，他们可以发表论文。 3-他们提到：使用DFT方法，并假设基于石墨烯厚度的C6N7单层厚度为3.35 a。当我们知道我们的C6N7单层不屈曲时，他们为什么选择这种厚度？ C6N7中离子的平面外运动的距离与石墨烯不同。
Recently, reported a comments on the our paper [Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 142102 (2021)]. With our response, the APL journal rejected their non scientific comments. There are some ambiguities about their claim: 1-They can check the phonon dispersion of their structure to see ZA out-of-plane mode. 2-They report the uniaxial stress-strain responses in Fig 2., which is unrelated to our paper. For a more helpful understanding of the mechanical properties of the novel C6N7 monolayer, they can publish a paper. 3-They mentioned: Using the DFT method and with assuming a thickness of 3.35 A for the C6N7 monolayer based on graphene thickness. Why did they choose this thickness while we know our C6N7 monolayer is at without buckling? The distance of ZA out-of-plane movement of ions in C6N7 is different from Graphene.
