Calculation and Interpretation of Ground Penetrating Radar for Temperature and Relative Water Content of Seasonal Permafrost in Qinghai-Tibet Platea
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please, see the attached pdf file with embedded comments.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thanks to the reviewers for their valuable comments. We made a point-to-point revision according to the reviewer's comments, which made the article more comprehensive and the quality of the article greatly improved. We are happy to continue to modify the article if any other comments in the future. Point-to-point modifications are as follows:Author's Notes File.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
All specific comments are placed in the pdf manuscript. But as a general remarks:
1- In geophysics data inversión processing is a mathematical- methodological method,you use this word for make a mathematical transfomations.
2- In all significative figures, thet colour scale is missing
3- The authors should better explain all processings applied to the GPR lines.
4- Specially, it is necessary to better justify the calculationand the aplication of the relative water content
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thanks to the reviewers for their valuable comments. We made a point-to-point revision according to the reviewer's comments, which made the article more comprehensive and the quality of the article greatly improved. We are happy to continue to modify the article if any other comments in the future. Point-to-point modifications are as follows:Author's Notes File.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I am fulfilled with these corrections, thanks.
Author Response
We are grateful to the reviewer for their valuable and professional comments. We have systematically checked and modified the grammar.
Reviewer 2 Report
The specifics comments are placed in the PDF manuscript.
But as as generals comments:
- I detect grammatical deficiencies in the text and the figure captions are scarcely described.
- The authors should improve the presentation of all figures.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
We are grateful to the reviewer for valuable and professional comments. After carefully analysing the reviewers' comments, we agreed and revised them as required. These review comments are of great help to the improvement of the quality of the article. We are happy to continue to modify the article if any other comments in the future. Point-to-point modifications are as atteched file. The revision in marked and revision_R2 are submit, please check it.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
The comments are in the PDF document.
Please, make all this suggestions because they are scientific failures
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewer and editor,
We are grateful to the reviewer for valuable and professional comments. We appreciate the seriousness, professionalism and responsibility of the editor.
After carefully analyzing the reviewers' comments, we agreed and revised them as required. These review comments are of great help to the improvement of the quality of the article. We are happy to continue to modify the article if any other comments in the future.
We submit the files about revision article on line. the files include:
1.Response to Reviewer 2 Comments_R3 (point to point);
2.revision manuscript__R3_marked in Supplementary;
3.manuscript_R3.
Thanks again for editor and reviewer.
Authors.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
