Efficient Superpixel Generation for Polarimetric SAR Images with Cross-Iteration and Hexagonal Initialization

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is very well written, clear and precise. The introduction provides sufficient background and include all relevant references. The research is designed appropriate. The methods are adequately described. The results are clearly presented. The conclusions are supported by the results.

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for the comments. The coauthors and I would like to thank you for your recognition and comments on our manuscript and research.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is interesting and well-organized, and it might be appropriate for publication in the Remote Sensing journal after performing a Minor revision. From this perspective, the authors should work to improve the manuscript. Some of the changes required are:

1. An additional English grammar and spelling check should be performed. Moreover, some sentences have to be reformulated to present the ideas and the findings of the proposed work in a clearer way.
2. Line 23; “earth” should be “Earth”. 
3. Some references are clustered (line 24: [1-6] and line 33: [11-14], it would be good to separate them and describe, them in short. Please Check all.
4. Formula 29, 30, and 31: Move them to the methodology section.
5. The methodology section: Add a flowchart of your methodology.
6. Checks all text abbreviations and adds a table with title <list of abbreviations> to the article. Note: The abbreviations list should be in alphabetical order.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Please find my report below.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The coauthors and I would like to thank you for the time and effort spent reviewing the manuscript. We sincerely thank the reviewer for the comments. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf