An Accurate Digital Subsidence Model for Deformation Detection of Coal Mining Areas Using a UAV-Based LiDAR
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The research conducted by the authors is valuable and interesting. I'm glad I had the opportunity to review this article.
I propose to the authors to analyze the following aspects and to improve these parts in the paper.
The study by the authors is well conducted and well presented, but does it have any limitations? I would like to ask the authors: is there no limit to your study? If not, why not? If so, what is it?
The authors include a very useful element in the paper: The flow chart of the proposed method. The diagram is the clarifying element for understanding the method proposed by the authors. This diagram has three elements that have the value of an assignment block, “Point cloud accuracy assessment”, “DEM accuracy assessment” and “DSuM accuracy assessment”, the result of which is pointless. I suggest that the authors make changes to the chart to correct these ambiguities.
I propose to the authors to make changes in the bibliography in order to harmonize it with the requirements of the journal.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for your constructive comments and suggestions, and we have revised the manuscript point-by-point carefully in response to their advice.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
Your manuscript entitled "An Accurate Digital Subsidence Model for Deformation Detection of Coal Mining Areas Using UAV-LiDAR" needs major refinements and revisions in terms of presenting the proposed concepts applied. More description on your methods is crucially needed in combination with appropriate explanation of figures. First of all there are several parts that writing is too basic for research paper and English language is badly misused. Please pay attention to the English editing and emphasize more on the description of your work. Some methods presented in the current manuscript needs better justification and critical justification in the manuscript. Title needs some adaptation. Please pay attention to be concise and provide a logical conceptual flow of the applied methods and approaches. Specific comments and suggestions can be found in the attached document.
Kind,
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewer,
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us the opportunity to revise the manuscript, and we are grateful to the reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript titled “An Accurate Digital Subsidence Model for Deformation Detection of Coal Mining Areas Using a UAV-based LiDAR” (Manuscript ID: remotesensing-1510050).
We have revised the manuscript carefully according to the comments, and have documented our revisions in the file of “response to reviewer #2”. Manuscript of the "track changes" (highlighted) version and our point-by-point response letter were attached, respectively. Our point-by-point response letter were attached below.
The major changes we have made include the following points (see the attachment for details):
- We revised the title and explained the ‘digital’ in the title.
- Revised the abstract.
- Added a detailed description of the study area, and changed the location Figure.
- Revised Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 14, and added the detailed instructions respectively.
- Reviewed and revised the English grammar and format of the whole paper.
- Explained the dataset in detail.
- Improved the description of the research method, and highlighted the crucial messages.
We trust that you will find the revised manuscript acceptable for publication in Remote Sensing.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Best wishes,
Yours sincerely,
Junliang Zheng
E-mail: jlzheng@xust.edu.cn
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
