Root Mirror Sites Identification and Service Area Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript studies the root mirror sites identification and service area analysis, the following are my comments:

1.     The language of this whole paper should be revised, currently this paper read badly.

2.     The introduction is too short, please make it much more comprehensive.

3.     The literature review is still not enough, please cite more papers to indicate your contribution, further, all the cited papers should be better within the last 5 years.

4.     Fig.1 should be improved with color version.

5.     Fig.3-4 are a bit not good looking, please use times new roman?

6.     More equations should be given to give the modelling?

7.     More comparsion cases should be done to verify the effectiveness of your method.

Author Response

Thank you for your precious comments and advice. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research.

We have studied the comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The main corrections in the paper and the response to the reviewer’s comments are as attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Kindly see the attached review. 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your precious comments and advice. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research.

We have studied the comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The main corrections in the paper and the response to the reviewer’s comments are as attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Please find the attached PDF for the review.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your precious comments and advice. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research.

We have studied the comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The main corrections in the paper and the response to the reviewer’s comments are in attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for carefully reviewing and revising the manuscript, and for including the suggestions in the final version.