Next Article in Journal
Research on Particle Size and Energy Consumption Law of Hard Coal Crushing under Impact Load Based on SHPB Test
Next Article in Special Issue
Evaluation of Radioactivity and Heavy Metals Content in a Basalt Aggregate for Concrete from Sicily, Southern Italy: A Case Study
Previous Article in Journal
Non-Autoregressive Sparse Transformer Networks for Pedestrian Trajectory Prediction
Previous Article in Special Issue
Multivariate Statistical Analyses and Potentially Toxic Elements Pollution Assessment of Pyroclastic Products from Mt. Etna, Sicily, Southern Italy
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Verification of Estimated Cosmic Neutron Intensities Using a Portable Neutron Monitoring System in Antarctica

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(5), 3297; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13053297
by Hiroshi Yasuda 1,*, Naoyuki Kurita 2 and Kazuaki Yajima 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(5), 3297; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13053297
Submission received: 7 February 2023 / Revised: 27 February 2023 / Accepted: 3 March 2023 / Published: 4 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Environmental Applied Physics)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript is about the verification of cosmic radiation models with a portable neutron monitor. It is a well-written work, I have only some short questions.

First of all, I recommend the modification of the title. In the part of Featured Application, you have expressed it absolutely well, you should  put this into the title (missing words: verification of models, portable neutron monitor)

1. Why did you choose this location for the measurement? Do you have any previous information from this area in the case of neutron measurement?

2. In Table 1.  the applicable temperature range is -30°C to 50°C. Was the temperature in this range during the measurement period? Did you measure the temperature? did you investigate the influence of temperature on the measured values?

3. Why did you choose this model? Why did not use other models too?

4. Figure 3. please put the legend into the diagram (the information is in the description of the figure, but if you put the legend the diagram will be "reader-friendly")

5. Figure 4. Coast to Inland instead of Coast to inlnad

6. Figure 5. Do you have any idea about the reason for the difference in the range of the high neutron dose rate?

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear A,

I have only a few comments regarding your manuscript.

Here they are:

1. introuction

the motivations to investigate cosmic neutrons, the purpose of your research activities, should be more emphasized in the introduction, in which your short summary of the state-of-art of what is going on in the field of the cosmic ray radiations does not give the deserved space to the topic of your manuscript. 

section 3.1

do you have some comment about fig. 3? 

section 3.3

could you spend more words commenting the discrepancies at high dose rates in fig. 5? for example, what you mean by cut-off rigidities and what is the role of a dipole magnet? 

Good luck for publication.

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop