PolSAR Image Classification with Active Complex-Valued Convolutional-Wavelet Neural Network and Markov Random Fields

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I congratulate the author(s) for the work. The article is generally well organized. Minor revisions have been found in a few places below. It is a useful study for active learning and machine learning. However, I am in favor of conducting such studies in your own fields, with your own ground truth data. In your future work, I recommend that you try these methods on your own data.

Line 47- You used "classification" twice. Using it once can explain your purpose.

Line 51: You wrote the sentence in italics. I understand that you write like this because it is an innovation, but you can write normally.

Line 466: “first”

Conclusion section should be improved.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. We highly appreciate the anonymous reviewer for the constructive comments and valuable suggestions on our work. We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Please find our uploaded revision and response in which we have carefully addressed the issues raised by the editor and reviewers point by point. Hope this revision is much clearer and more readable.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I attached a word file, hope you can access it

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. We highly appreciate the anonymous reviewer for the constructive comments and valuable suggestions on our work. We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Please find our uploaded revision and response in which we have carefully addressed the issues raised by the editor and reviewers point by point. Hope this revision is much clearer and more readable.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

I suggest the narration and overall language be revisited for improving for a better and crisper presentation of the technical content. A check for typographical issues at some places too would be advisable.

I suggest the narration and overall language be revisited for improving for a better and crisper presentation of the technical content. A check for typographical issues at some places too would be advisable.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. We highly appreciate the anonymous reviewer for the constructive comments and valuable suggestions on our work. We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Please find our uploaded revision and response in which we have carefully addressed the issues raised by the editor and reviewers point by point. Hope this revision is much clearer and more readable.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf