claim that the methods used to distinguish thermal from hot carrier effects in our recent report are inaccurate and that our data can be explained by a purely thermal mechanism with a fixed activation energy. This conclusion is invalid, because they substantially misinterpret the emissivity of the photocatalyst and assume a linear intensity-dependent temperature in their model that is unrealistic.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: