A Novel Estimation Method of Water Surface Micro-Amplitude Wave Frequency for Cross-Media Communication

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

The authors have corrected the typos I pointed out in the first review. However, some things still need to be changed.

·         Line 121: Why is d (distance) superscript? Is it necessary to introduce this symbol, since I cannot see its use in the manuscript?

·         Lines 122, 128-130, 164, 166, 170, 177, and 286, Eqs. (1)-(3), (5) and (6), and Table 1. Subscripts “w”, “e”, “r”, “T”, “R”, “b,up”, “radar”, “speaker”, “p”, “w1”, and “w2” are not variables and accordingly should not be italicized.

·         Line 155. Double dot. Please delete one of them.

·         Line 170. What is c_r? Please explain it in the manuscript.

·         Lines 194, 199, 201-203. Why is the superscript “th” italicized?

·         Line 197. In the rest of the text, the authors have replaced "exp" with "e". Why not here as well?

·         Line 269. Please remove space after K.

·         List of abbreviations does not contain TARF.

One of my earlier comments was, "The reference list contains many references that are not written in accordance with the journal instructions." The authors corrected only 3 references and concluded that they made the correction in accordance with my suggestion. I reviewed the reference list and found at least 22 typos, incomplete data, or inconsistencies with the journal's instructions. Did the authors make a comprehensive revision of their manuscript or just an apparent correction? The reference list must be checked carefully and in detail.

After the first review, I said that 17 figures were too many for the manuscript. Now there are 15 figures in the manuscript. This can hardly be called a reduction.

In general, the authors have made some improvements, but there is still things to be done. Therefore, I suggest that the manuscript be thoroughly revised once again.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

The article has been improved in this new version. Few corrections are still needed.

 

OVERALL: Please enlarge all figures. The quality of figure is now satisfactory, but still font sizes and images must be enlarged to be clearer for all readers.

 

 

INTRODUCTION: Please, consider in the scientific background of your study the importance of remote sensing-based alghorhitms for the monitoring of natural resources (i.e.,

 

Lama, G.F.C., Errico, A., Pasquino, V., Mirzaei, S., Preti, F., Chirico, G.B. 2022. Velocity uncertainty quantification based on Riparian vegetation indices in open channels colonized by Phragmites australis. J. Ecohydraulics 7(1), 71–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/24705357.2021.1938255.

 

Tur, R., & Yontem, S. (2021). A comparison of soft computing methods for the prediction of wave height parameters. Knowledge-Based Engineering and Sciences, 2(1), 31-46.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

Lines 222-223. The part "N is the sampling points and n is the sampling moments" sounds strange. Should this text be written "N is the number of sampling points and n is the sampling moment"?

Reference List: According to the Instructions for Authors, journal volumes must be written in italics.

Reference 22. Authors twice indicate the year in which the book was published.

Reference 23. What does the "+" sign after the journal name mean?

Reference 30. Add the article number 091202.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

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

“A Novel Estimation Method of Water Surface Micro Amplitude Wave Frequency for Cross-media Communication” by Luo et al. is an interesting manuscript that deserves publication in the journal Remote Sensing, but after major revision.

 

Here are the comments:

 - The authors need to review all the equations very carefully, as well as the explanations of the parameters from the equations. I will list here some inconsistencies that I noticed:

o   The authors need to standardize the notation of the exponential function. In some equations the authors use the letter “e” while in others “exp” is used. In addition, “e” should be written in regular font, not italics.

o   Line 199. There is no N in equation (7).

o   Eq. (12). What is indicated by the capital letter N and what is indicated by the lowercase letter n?

o   Line 289. There is no N_e in equation (19).

 - Lines 130 and 131. It seems appropriate to replace “x,z are the two dimensional axis of water surface” with further text: “x and z are the axes of the two-dimensional water surface”.

 - Lines 135, 136, 214, 326, 322, 327, 386, 387, 398, 407, 413, 421, 441, 447, 448, 467, 482, 486, 488-490, 492, 494, 496-498, 502, 505, 506, 509-511, 513, 514, 517, 519-522, 543 and 545, as well as Tables 2, 3 and 4, than Eq. (20), and finally Figure 13. Please use regular font for the units and/or separate the values from the units with spaces if necessary.

 - Line 136. Please define “normal temperature”.

 - Chapter 2.2. Primary, the bullets used in this chapter are not the same size. However, writing text in bullets does not seem appropriate for a scientific paper, so I recommend you avoid doing so.

 - Line 199. Please consider using “point” instead of “points”.

 - Line 199. Please use “k^th” instead of “kth”.

·- Lines 204 and 208. Please use “(p–1)^th” instead of “(p–1)th”.

 - Lines 205, 207 and 209. Please use “p^th” instead of “pth”.

 - Line 206. Use the lowercase “c” in the word “Combine”.

 - Line 209. Perhaps use “a given threshold” instead of “a given the threshold”?

 - Lines 214, 220 and 407. Put “, and 300 Hz signals”.

 - Line 222. Use the lowercase “w” in the word “When”.

 - Lines 236 and 237. It seems better to use “Equations (10) and (11)” instead of “Equation (10) and Equation (11)”.

 - Line 238. Add a comma before N–1.

 - Table 1. Please correct references to equations so that they are the same as in the rest of the text. For example, use “Eq. (11)” instead of “Eq.11”. In addition, replace “Eq.14-15” with “Eqs. (14) and (15)”.

 - Line 387. I believe that “signals” should be used instead of “signal”?

 - Table 4. “db” or “dB”?

 - Line 479. Use “kHz” instead of “KHz”.

 - Lines 479 and 480. The sentence “For the six groups of different duration experiments set above, the number of sampling points for each frequency can be calculated as: 63,125,625,1250,6250,12500” is not clear enough. Please rewrite the sentence to be more informative.

 - Line 494. Use spaces to separate words. Also use the lowercase letter “e” in the word “Error”.

 - Table 5. All Results (and also all Errors) should have the same number of digits.

 -  Line 545. “The cross-media communication rate is 400bit/s”. This was already mentioned in the previous sentence.

 - The Reference list contains many references that are not written in accordance with the journal instructions.

 - The general impression is that 17 figures are too many for the manuscript.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is interesting and stimulating; Here you can find my comments:

 

OVERALL: - Please, replace all figures with HD images, and enlarge them and the font sized for all figures. This is mandatory for improving the scientific quality of the article.

 

ABSTRACT - Please, deifne all symbols and acronyms. This is mandatory for this article.

 

INTRODUCTION: Please, consider in the scientific background of your article also the application of advanced acoustic-based methods in the monitoring of water resources in vegetated areas (i.e.,

 

McGlade, J.; Wallace, L.; Reinke, K.; Jones, S. The Potential of Low-Cost 3D Imaging Technologies for Forestry Applications: Setting a Research Agenda for Low-Cost Remote Sensing Inventory Tasks. Forests 2022, 13, 204. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13020204.

Jalonen, J., Järvelä, J., Virtanen, J. P., Vaaja, M., Kurkela, M., & Hyyppä, H. (2015). Determining characteristic vegetation areas by terrestrial laser scanning for floodplain flow modeling. Water, 7(2), 420-437. https://doi.org/10.3390/w7020420.

Khan, M.A., Sharma, N., Lama, G.F.C., Hasan, M., Garg, R., Busico, G., & Alharbi, R.S. (2022) Three-Dimensional Hole Size (3DHS) Approach for Water Flow Turbulence Analysis over Emerging Sand Bars: Flume-Scale Experiments. Water, 14, 1889. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14121889)

 

METHODS and ALGORITHM- Please, insert an HD figure for each subsection. Ther reader must be guided properly.

 

 

 

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper presents improvements in signal detection and parameter estimation for cross-water-air communication system. The main concept is derived from ref. [18], and the RELAX algorithm is modified to improve the performance. There are some merits that experiments/demonstrations are provided in addition of simulations, and some new tricks in tweaking existing algorithms. Yet there are also serious flaws tha the reveiewer deems this paper not qualified to be published. 

1. The writing should be thoroughly overhauled. The poor writing quality simply wastes too much of the reviewer's time and energy to merely understand what the paper says. 

2. This paper is supposed to be about communications; yet it reads like a paper about detecting sinusoids. There are very little considerations of utilizing the pretext of communications (for instance, protocols) to facilitate solving signal detection and parameter estimation problems. For instance, the use of GIP is to solve the common problem of symbol synchronization in communications, which can be addressed by many synchronization algorithms. 

3. One possible explanation of point 2 is because of the peculiarity of cross-media communications. In this case, the authors should spend some sincere efforts to explain the rationale in the introduction section. 

4. The modified RELAX algorithm is a simple windowing operation, which in practice people will do it anyway. In the context of communication, why the signal detection problem is framed as sinusoid detection without knowing candidate frequencies? Again the authors should explain their rationale. 

5. Usually communication signals are modeled as cyclostationary, instead of being labeled as non-stationary. 

6. Forget about communications, Let's talk about sinusoid detection. There are other high-resolution algorithms, such as MUSIC and ESPRIT, or even deep learning may do a better job than RELAX.

7. More grammatical errors, poor word usage and incomprehensible places are highlighted in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf