“…In recent past CuO & CuS based core-shell photodetectors has been developed by several scientists like the p-CuO/n-MoS 2 flexible heterojunction photo detector was reported by Zhang et al with low-dark current ∼ 0.039 nA and highest detectivity ∼ 3.27 × 10 8 Jones [ 14 ], Wang et al developed the nanostructured p-CuO/n-ZnO heterojunction photodetector and observed the responsivity ∼ 0.040A/W at 1 V and 0.123 A/W at 2 V, Xie et al reported the CuO/SnO 2 UV photodetector and noticed the enhancement [ 15 ], Tian et al fabricated the In 2 Ge 2 O 7 photodetector with CuO coating and observed the high responsivity and quantum efficiency ∼ 7.34 × 10 5 A W −1 & 3.5 × 10 6 , respectively [ 16 ], Sahatiya et al reported the MoS 2 (n)–CuO(p) flexible diode on cellulose paper with ideality factor 1.89 eV, barrier height 0.243 eV, and responsivity ∼ 42 mA/W [ 17 ], Shin et al developed the p-CuO/n-Cu 1-x In x O core/shell UV photodetector and noticed the photoresponsivity ∼ 0.045 A/W [ 18 ], CuO/ZnO based UV photodetector with improved electrical nature was developed by Noothongkaew et al [ 19 ], UV detector based on ZnO/CuO was fabricated with by Vikas et al [ 20 ], Mohammadi et al reported the ZnO/NiO(CuO) photodetector with enhanced properties [ 21 ], p-CuO/n-ZnO photodetectors has been fabricated by Ji et al [ 22 ]. Xu et al p‐CuS‐ZnS/n‐ZnO photodetectors with responsivity ∼ 12 mA W −1 at 300 nm [ 23 ], Zhnag et al developed the n‐SrTiO3 (n‐STO) and p‐CuS‐ZnS (p‐CZS) photodetectors with highest responsivity ∼ 5.4 μA W −1 (at 390 nm), detectivity ∼ 1.6 × 10 9 Jones [ 24 ], Panigrahi et al fabricated n-ZnO/p-CuS photodetectors and investigated [ 25 ], etc. Along with the above-mentioned materials there are several other materials who has been employed and investigated as UV photodetectors like: Sr 2 Nb 3 O 10 with R = 1214 A W −1 , EQE = 5.6 × 10 5 %, D* = 1.4 × 10 14 Jones @270 nm and 1 V bias by Li et al [ 26 ], and several other 2D photodetectors (BP, GaSe, MoS2 and SnSe) discussed by Zhang et al [ 27 ], BaTiO 3 /MoS 2 reported by Ying et al with R λ of 120 vs 1.7 A W −1 & EQE of 4.78 × 10 4 vs 4.5 × 10 2 % @365 nm compare to bare MoS 2 [ 28 ], and Li et al reported the hybrid CuO@In 2 O 3 with R = 2.24 × 10 4 A/W [ 29 ].…”