Table 8. Comparative analysis of HF and H₂S gas sensing performance of various 2D nanomaterials, based on key parameters including adsorption energy (E_ads), band gap (E_g), charge transfer (Δq), work function (Φ), and recovery time.

Structure	Gas	E ads (eV)	E g (eV)	Δq (e)	Φ (eV)	Recovery time (s)	Ref.
BP	HF	−0.276	0.879	−0.08	1.719	5.7 × 10−11	—
BP	H2S	−0.133	0.866	0.00	1.751	2.3 × 10−13	—
Al-BP	HF	−1.651	1.007	−0.62	1.576	6.7 × 1012	—
Al-BP	H2S	−0.828	0.991	0.09	1.402	1.1 × 10−1	—
Ti-BP	HF	−0.502	0.000	−0.06	1.643	3.5 × 10−7	—
Ti-BP	H2S	−0.584	0.000	0.08	1.579	8.5 × 10−6	—
PdAs2	HF	−0.390	0.300	0.11	4.708	4.2 × 10−6	85
PdAs2	H2S	−0.490	0.280	−0.13	4.573	1.8 × 10−4	85
ZnS ML	HF	−0.860	2.940	−0.08	6.402	2.8 × 102	86
β-TeO2	H2S	−0.298	2.705	0.003	—	1.0 × 10−7	87
GeS2	HF	−0.250	0.930	−0.13	—	1.5 × 10−8	88
GeS2	H2S	−0.230	0.440	−0.02	—	6.5 × 10−9	88
CuBr	HF	−0.222	3.191	−0.03	5.130	7.1 × 10−9	89
BNNS	H2S	−0.175	4.035	−0.02	4.230	9.0 × 10−10	90
Pristine twin graphene	HF	−0.160	0.710	−0.05	—	—	91
Pristine twin graphene	H2S	−0.220	0.680	−0.06	—	—	91