A Robust Design Method for Ultra-Low-Frequency Oscillation Suppression Control in Hydro–Photovoltaic Complementary Systems

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors presented the work titled "A Robust Design Method for Ultra-Low Frequency Oscillation Suppression Control Based on Hydro-Photovoltaic Complementary Systems" is a good effort. Here are some minor suggestions which will improve the manuscript.

1- The introduction section can be improved.

2- Add a separate section at the end of the introduction of contributions.

3- Please add more analysis of the results.

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewers for the careful assessment of our manuscript and the valuable comments and suggestions. We have carefully considered the reviewer's comments and provided responses as shown in the attached document. Correspondingly, changes are made to the revised manuscript in red.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper presents a robust design method for Ultra-Low Frequency Oscillation suppression control based on Hydro-Photovoltaic complementary systems; However, I believe that this paper can be further improved in the following aspects, especially the presentation of the content:

1.       To enhance the introduction, it would be beneficial to provide more specific background information on the challenges faced in ULFO problem existing in the hydro-PV. This additional context would further emphasize the significance of the proposed method.

2.       Incorporating recent studies and their findings would also enhance the relevance and currency of the related work section. By expanding on these aspects, the reader would gain a deeper understanding of the existing approaches and their limitations, which would contribute to the motivation for the proposed method.

3.       Should add 10 more recent references related to your work.

4.       The conclusion provides a concise summary of the research and its outcomes. It should effectively highlight the superior performance of the proposed methods. The mention of future research directions such as potential avenues for further exploration.

1.       There are some grammatical and typos errors also which should be removed.

1There are some grammatical and typos errors also which should be removed.

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewers for the careful assessment of our manuscript and the valuable comments and suggestions. We have carefully considered the reviewer's comments and provided responses as shown in the attached document. Correspondingly, changes are made to the revised manuscript in red.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The revised version of the manuscript certainly improved the quality of the paper. Most of the comments are positively responded by the authors and the paper is updated accordingly. The paper is accepted in this form.