Next Article in Journal
A Multi-Sensor Satellite Approach to Characterize the Volcanic Deposits Emitted during Etna’s Lava Fountaining: The 2020–2022 Study Case
Next Article in Special Issue
Determination of Accurate Dynamic Topography for the Baltic Sea Using Satellite Altimetry and a Marine Geoid Model
Previous Article in Journal
Adversarial Remote Sensing Scene Classification Based on Lie Group Feature Learning
Previous Article in Special Issue
Monitoring Spatial-Temporal Variations of Lake Level in Western China Using ICESat-1 and CryoSat-2 Satellite Altimetry
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Estimation of Geopotential Value W0 for the Geoid and Local Vertical Datum Parameters

Remote Sens. 2023, 15(4), 912; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15040912
by Xinyu Liu 1, Shanshan Li 1,*, Jiajia Yuan 2, Diao Fan 1 and Xuli Tan 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(4), 912; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15040912
Submission received: 9 November 2022 / Revised: 1 February 2023 / Accepted: 3 February 2023 / Published: 7 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Satellite Altimetry: Technology and Application in Geodesy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript is extremely poorly written both in terms of structure and in terms of its use of English, fails to properly describe and document the techniques used and adequately explain the numerical results obtained, and contains glaring omissions of appropriate reference citations. The manuscript is not suitable for publication.

Along with this review I am uploading an annotated version of the manuscript, with numerous comments and corrections of mine, which the authors should consider in their drafting of possible future manuscripts related to this topic.

 I recommend outright rejection.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In this manuscript, a new geopotential value W0 is obtained from the new altimetry data, which will provide us with a new reference to solve the thorny problem of global vertical datum unification. The manuscript is well argued and well structured, which shows that the authors have good scientific literacy. To make the manuscript more excellent, I put forward the following suggestions for reference:

 

Point 1: For simplicity, Figures 1-3, Figures 6-9 and Table 7-8 can be combined separately.

 

Point 2: P3L115: “The figure 1” should be changed to “Figure 1”, the same expression below should be modified too. The English expression has many flaws and should be improved.

 

Point 3: In Chapter 3, there are too many formulas listed, some basic formulas do not need to be described.

 

Point 4: P18: The conclusion, which is too simple, should be more systematic and logical.

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1.     Line 41: What does “SST” mean?

2.     Line 193: The sentence “The new method ignores the weak correlation between the intersecting 193 altimetry satellite arc segment during the calculation process” needs modification. “The new method ignores the weak correlation among the intersecting 193 altimetry satellite arc segments during the calculation process

3.     After section 3.3.2, whether is it required to discuss some properties of your methods.

 

In all, this paper calculates W0 by using a lot of data, to unify the global vertical datum. The whole method and results are reliable. However, if the paper can further analyze the method used and the data resolution to the accuracy of the whole result, it will greatly improve the quality of the paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have failed to address satisfactorily many of my comments on their original version. Their revised version remains unacceptable for publication.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you for your decision and constructive comments on my manuscript. We have carefully considered the suggestion of Reviewer and make some changes. We have tried our best to improve and made some changes in the manuscript. If you are not satisfied, can you point out some specific comments for us to solve?

Back to TopTop