# Response to editorial review comments

This handoff maps the teaching-exercise comments to changes from catalyst-brief-v1.md to catalyst-brief-v2.md. It is not journal or author correspondence.

| ID | Response | Exact revised section | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | Replaced the summary with a 117-word version retaining the distinct −1.2 V selectivity and −0.8 V, 20 h durability conditions. | Executive summary | Resolved |
| C2 | Added a compact two-row table with metric, value/duration, potential, context, and locator. | Operating points | Resolved |
| C3 | Replaced broad absence claims with statements bounded to the cited performance discussion, methods, and supplementary figures. | Executive summary; Evidence assessment; Methodological limits; Bottom line | Resolved |
| C4 | Added three labeled proposals tied to selectivity retention, conversion/carbon balance, and device energy/structural durability. No results are implied. | Proposed follow-up checks | Resolved |
| C5 | Every locator explicitly says Main PDF or Supplementary PDF and retains figure labels; the DOI appears in the source line and evidence section. | Operating points; Evidence assessment | Resolved |
| C6 | Created separate v2 and response files; v1 was not overwritten. Each comment is mapped here to exact sections. | Entire catalyst-brief-v2.md and this response file | Resolved |

## Verification notes

- Executive summary: 117 whitespace-delimited words.
- Peak selectivity remains FE_CO = 98.9% at −1.2 V vs RHE.
- Durability remains a separate 20 h current-density test at −0.8 V vs RHE.
- DOI retained: 10.1038/s41467-019-12510-0.
- No proposed experiment is presented as performed.

## Remaining limitation

The linked-PDF figure-element cache was unavailable for direct visual inspection. Numerical and qualitative statements therefore follow retrieved full-text passages and figure captions. In particular, “only slight” current-density decrease is the authors’ textual characterization; no value was estimated from the plot.