In the original version of this article, unfortunately several Figures and Tables were incorrectly given: In Section3.2, Fig.2 with incorrect JCPDS file number for XRD spectra needed correction. The correct information is as follows: (Figure presented.) XRD spectra of a undoped CuO@CoO and b Smx:CuO@CoO NS Figure2 display the XRD patterns of CuO:CoO and Smx CuO:CoO NS. The most evident peak in the XRD pattern of CuO: CoO (Fig.2(a)) appeared at 2? = 15.6, 26.4, 31.9, 49.9, 58.8 corresponding to the reflections of (111), (311), (301), (321), (322). The Smx CuO:CoO (Fig.2(b)) (x = 1, 5, 10 and 12%) NS having reflections detected at 2? = 16.09, 22.7, 29.5, 32.3, 35.8, 39.7, 42.4, 46.5, 50.6, 52.1, 58.4, 68.2 corresponding to the planes (211), (222), (400), (200), (332), (110), (111), (111), (200), (202), (211), (020), (220). The appearance of a sharp peak shows low crystallinity and well dispersion of Sm NPs in the crystal structure and the pattern matches with JCPDS file No 96431-2062, 96431-7773 and 96100-1608 [1315]. In Section3.3, the UV visible spectra absorption intensities in Fig.3 needed correction. The correct information is as follows: (Figure presented.) UVvisible spectra of a undopedCuO-CoO NS and b Smx:CuO-CoO NS Figure3(a) display the maximum optical absorption (? max) of CuO:CoO NS at 206.8nm. Optical absorbance was carried out at ambient conditions. Sm1% CuO: CoO NS as displayed in Fig.3(b) exhibits maximum absorbance (? max) at 353.8nm. Further, Sm5% CuO: CoO NS as displayed in Fig.3(b) revealed maximum absorbance (? max) appeared at 355.4nm. In addition, Sm10% CuO: CoO NS maximum absorbance spectrum (? max) centered at 359.7nm. However, 12% of Sm doped CuO:CoO NS displayed ? max at 360.3nm. As the Sm 3+ doping concentration increases from 1 to 12% Eg value decreases from 3.11eV to 3.06eV (Fig.4(a)(d)). From the graph (Fig.4(d)) optical band gap of Sm12% CuO: CoO was found to be 3.06eV. (Figure presented.) Tauc plot of a Sm1%:CuO-CoO b Sm5%:CuO-CoO c Sm10%:CuO-CoO d Sm12%:CuO-CoO NS In Section3.3, Fig.4, Tauc's plot needed correction. The correct Fig.4 is given as follows: In Fig.6, the SEM images scale bars were incorrectly given. The corrected Fig.6 is as follows: (Figure presented.) SEM images of a CuO-CoO NS b Sm1%: CuO-CoO b Sm5%: CuO-CoO c Sm10%: CuO-CoO d Sm12%: CuO-CoO NS In Section3.5., Fig.7, the EDX composition table referred wrongly with respect to atomic % and weight %. The correct information and Fig.7 is as follows: (Figure presented.) SEMEDX spectra with a different selected areas b spectrum with inset table summarizing the elemental composition Figure7(a) and (b) result from the Sm 10.47 wt. %, Cu 34.26 wt. %, Co 36.02 wt. %. Overall, the composition of Sm, Cu, Co and O was observed to be preserved during experimentation, therefore demonstrating the chemical stability of the material. In Section3.6, for the SAED patterns of Smx CuO:CoO NS as displayed in Fig.8(c), the following information needs to be added: These SAED patterns are consistent with PXRD pattern and reconfirm the formation of good crystallinity of the as-synthesized NS as well as rule out the presence of secondary crystalline phases in SmxCuO:CoO NS. The previously published Fig.9 looks blur/unclear and resemble like an edited image. The correct Fig.9 with high resolution is given as follows: (Figure presented.) BET spectra of a N2 adsorption Vs relative pressure b cumulative pore volume Vs pore area (Sm12%:CuO-CoO NS) c cumulative pore volume Vs pore diameter of (Sm10%: CuO-CoO NS) d cumulative pore volume Vs pore diameter (Sm12%:CuO-CoO NS) The previously published Fig.11 looks blur/unclear and resemble like an edited image. The correct Fig.11 with high resolution is given as follows: (Figure presented.) a I-V characteristics for Sm10%:CuO-CoO b ideality factor for Sm10%:CuO-CoO c dynamic resistance for Sm10%:CuO-CoO d variation of reduced activation energy with temperature The previously published Fig.12 looks blur/unclear and resemble like an edited image. The correct Fig.12 with high resolution is given as follows: (Figure presented.) a Variation of AC resistance with frequency for Sm10%:CuO-CoO b variation of AC resistance with frequency for different temperatures, Smx:CuO-CoO cI-V characteristics for Sm12%:CuO-CoO NS The previously published Fig.13 looks blur/unclear and resemble like an edited image. The correct Fig.13 with high resolution is given as follows: (Figure presented.) a Dynamic resistance for Sm10%:CuO-CoO with temperature (T) b AC resistance Vs frequency for Sm12%:CuO-CoO c AC resistance with frequency Vs different T d ideality factor for Smx:CuO-CoO NS Unfortunately, the previously published Table1 had incorrect elemental composition data. The correct Table1 is given as follows: (Table presented.) Elemental composition of Smx:CuO-CoO NS Nanostructures Sm Cu Co Na O K Pb Purity Sm2O3 96.7 - - - 1.54 - 0.25 98.49 CuO:CoO - 36.9 38.7 - 20.49 - 1.11 97.20 Sm12%CuO:CoO 12.02 32.2 32.4 - 20.47 0.02 - 97.11 Unfortunately, the UVvisible values in Table4 were not correct. The correct Table4 is given as follows: (Table presented.) Optical absorption spectra of pure Sm2O3, CuO, CoO and Smx:CuO-CoO (1%, 5%, 10% and 12%) NS Nanostructures ? max (nm) Eg (eV) Absorption Region Pure Sm2O3 224 1.87 Ultraviolet Pure CuO 218 1.96 Ultraviolet Pure CoO 208 2.25 Ultraviolet Sm1%: CuO:CoO 353.8 3.11 Ultraviolet Sm5%: CuO:CoO 355.4 3.07 Ultraviolet Sm10%:CuO:CoO 359.7 3.06 Ultraviolet Sm12%:CuO:CoO 360.3 3.06 Ultraviolet In the Conclusions, the following information needs to be added for the Sm3+ doped CuO:CoO NS: Redshift in the optical absorptivity and the shift in the Eg value from 3.11eV to 3.06eV were found as the Sm3+ concentration increases inside CuO:CoO NS. We are sorry for any inconvenience caused. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024.
