Search

My comments concern the errors in the crystallographic part and possible misconduct of the authors of the commented paper regarding their usage of the same SEM image in different subsequent works. Moreover, the true chemical composition of the studied sample is questionable since the authors claim different systems for the same SEM micrograph in five different papers mentioned here.

My comments concern the uncertainties in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The lattice parameters are incorrectly evaluated and the symmetry is not monoclinic. Therefore, the subsequent data on other measurements have limited value. The correct structural data are presented indicating the coexistence of two cubic phases which differ in crystallite size. A size-induced phase transition can be supposed to exist in the studied sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My comments concern the significant errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The diffraction patterns are erroneously analysed and the final chemical composition is different than those supposed in the paper. There are also some manipulations with data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My comments concern the errors in the crystallographic part of a recent paper published in this journal entitled “Structural and electrical analysis of polycrystalline ceramic PbCaBiNbO6” by A.K. Panda et al., J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Elektron. 34, 1640 (2023). The true chemical composition of the studied sample is very different from PbCaBiNbO6 as proposed by authors in their paper. A comparison with three similar compounds was presented indicating that the samples are mixtures of (at least) two crystals Therefore, the subsequent data on other measurements are not on the sample composition the authors have identified and have limited value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My comments concern the uncertainties in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The correct crystal structure should be described as NaNbO3:K,Bi,Ti instead of solid solution proposed by authors and described as 0.075(K0.5Bi0.5TiO3)–0.925(NaNbO3). Moreover, the studied sample has no ferroelectric properties; the P–E loop is of “banana”-type, only. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]