How to Increase the Analog-to-Digital Converter Speed in Optoelectronic Systems of the Seed Quality Rapid Analyzer
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Previous comments addressed. Interesting article and design.
Author Response
Point. Previous comments addressed. Interesting article and design.
Response. The authors sincerely thank the reviewer for his highly professional comments, which significantly contributed to the improvement of the manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors response to reviewer comment is not thorough. Authors have not answered the reviewer concerns.
Reviewer is still concerned about the test of the presented scheme. Once again Reviewer encourages authors to present the fabricated device based on this scheme and show measurement results.
This will enhance the readability and impact of the paper.
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for his comments.
To date, the device is claimed for patenting and is only planned for production due to its very high cost. In this regard, the calculation of the error is possible only theoretically. As shown in the article, the level of technology for the production of optical splitters achieved by Michael S. Cohen, Qikertown (USA) and Nanonics Imaging Ltd, Jerusalem (Israel), splitters which have insertion loss <0.1 dB, flatness ratio offshoots 0.1 dB, it provides the maximum relative error of signal transmission no more than 0.001%, which accuracy assessment of the ADC can be neglected. Moreover, if for the manufacture of ultra-precision ADC to use the well-known technology for the manufacture of optical splitters based on the use of Mach-Zehnder interferometers with current regulation of the phase modulation of the optical signal in one of the arms (which, without changing the principle of operation, sharply increases the cost of the device), the error of branching can be reduced to almost zero. In the article, this technology is not considered as not making anything new in the principle of operation of the device in question.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Okay
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This review is for the communication paper with title “How to Increase the Analog-to-Digital Converter Speed in Optoelectronic Systems of the Seed Quality Rapid Analyzer” by authors in the Inventions journal.
The paper aims to discuss an invention of optical ADC useful for seed analysis. The paper has three sections. In the introduction section, authors present state-of-the-art of the ADC devices. In the second section, the working principle of the proposed device is discussed. Finally, the paper is concluded.
In the Abstract, authors claim to have invented an ultra-fast ADC that can be utilized for quality control of seeds.
However, in the remainder of the paper authors seem not to discuss the applicability of their invention for seed analysis. The device schematic diagram shown in Fig. 1 is considered from earlier published studies cited as [18,20]. This confuses the reviewer about the originality of the author’s invention. Authors are required to clearly point out their contribution. Further the working of the device is merely discussed. The actual fabricated ADC device is not shown anywhere in the paper. It would be nice to show the results of the invention to confirm the claims on the ultrafast ADC that can be applicable to seed quality control.
Author Response
The authors sincerely thank the reviewer for his highly professional comments, which significantly contributed to the improvement of the manuscript.
Response: References to the studies given as [18,20] are made only for the purpose of illustrating the technologies that can be used in the construction of functional elements of the ADC under consideration. The scheme of the device is completely original, which is confirmed by the results of the patent research, some of the sources used in the conduct of which is given in the list of references. More disclosed results of the invention (see L69-77, 101-111, 180-182), specific speed of information processing in the ADC (see L69-77) and its scope (see L180-182).
Reviewer 2 Report
Figure 1: Change second set of OBEs with 5N+i to 5M+i.
Line 94: At end, beomces equal to M usl.the - correct this sentence and perhaps work on wording of this paragraph.
Paper suggests GHz range operation, yet the primary limit seems to be the elctro-optical amplifier with a 5-10 ns response times suggest sub GHz performance.
I would think an analysis of potential error based on known tolerances for splitting percentages of optical splitters would be of interest and perhaps mechanisms to adjust for any significant deviations from desired values.
I feel more time needs to be spent on explaining the 9 splitter elements and the 10 unifier elements to detail how the positional binary i value is obtained or if explained elsewhere then add a reference.
The device is interesting, but I think the overall quality of the device explanation needs improving. Given this is the journal Inventions, I feel the invention needs to be adequately described and since this appears to be a paper design only, challenges with fabrication of the device should be addressed (optical splitters have certain tolerances, and given the number of splitter elements would be curious how this might impact performance), and how those challenges might be addressed.
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for the valuable comment and provided the suggested additions in the revised version (see L69-77; 101-106; 107-111; 180-182).
The authors hope that all the improvements made in the article in accordance with the comments of the reviewer, in general, improved the quality of explanation of the device.
Point 1: Moderate English changes required.
Response 1: We thank the reviewer and checked the language and the spelling errors and correct them.
Point 2: Figure 1: Change second set of OBEs with 5N+i to 5M+i.OBEs with 5N+i to 5M+i.
Response 2: The numbering of the second set of optical bistable elements in figure 1 is changed in accordance with the reviewer's remark.bistable elements in figure 1 is changed in accordance with the reviewer's remark.
Point3: Line 94: At end, «becomes equal to M usl.the» - correct this sentence and perhaps work on wording of this paragraph.usl.the» - correct this sentence and perhaps work on wording of this paragraph.
Response 3: Corrected the sentence specified by the reviewer, and completely revised the wording of this paragraph (see L101-111).
Point 4: Paper suggests GHz range operation, yet the primary limit seems to be the electro-optical amplifier with a 5-10 ns response times suggest sub GHz performance.GHz range operation, yet the primary limit seems to be the electro-optical amplifier with a 5-10 ns response times suggest sub GHz performance.
Response 4: The range of operation of the device is specified more correctly - as Sub-GHz (see L18, 35, 50, 56 & 59).GHz (see L18, 35, 50, 56 & 59).
Point 5: I would think an analysis of potential error based on known tolerances for splitting percentages of optical splitters would be of interest and perhaps mechanisms to adjust for any significant deviations from desired values.
Response 5: Examples of existing optical splitters providing the maximum relative error of signal transmission, which can be neglected when assessing the accuracy of the ADC, as well as a possible mechanism for correcting signal distortion when using optical splitters with lower quality characteristics (see L69-77).ADC, as well as a possible mechanism for correcting signal distortion when using optical splitters with lower quality characteristics (see L69-77).
Point 6: I feel more time needs to be spent on explaining the 9 splitter elements and the 10 unifier elements to detail how the positional binary i value is obtained or if explained elsewhere then add a reference.
Response 6: Explains in detail how you obtained the position binary value "i" through the diagramming of the splitter 9 and the combiner 10 (see L101-106).
Point 7: The device is interesting, but I think the overall quality of the device explanation needs improving. Given this is the journal Inventions, I feel the invention needs to be adequately described and since this appears to be a paper design only, challenges with fabrication of the device should be addressed (optical splitters have certain tolerances, and given the number of splitter elements would be curious how this might impact performance), and how those challenges might be addressed.
Response 7: The parameters of modern optical splitters providing the level of error of signal conversion, which practically does not affect the accuracy of analog-to-digital conversion (see L69-77).
