Low-Profile Harmonic Transponder for IoT Applications

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper presents a harmonic transponder that can overcome the previously mentioned limitations. In this regard, the zero biasing HSMS-2850 Schottky diode has been chosen as the nonlinear element due to its high sensitivity and low-cost packaging. The diode is matched to the antennas using T-matching network. Some comments are as follows.

Line 8, 'The introduced transponder is outperforming the state of the art work from the..' should be 'The introduced transponder outperforms the state of the art work from the'. 

The novelty is not very clear as it is currently written. I suggest summarizing the contributions in the introduction.

Ref9 is not closely relevant. It should be replaced with a newer and more relevant work.

The words in figure 1 are too small blurred to be seen. The quality should be improved.

The conversion loss of the biased diode is measured after calibrating the cables and filters losses. The methodology used here is not conventional. Some explanations together with the findings should be given.

 

Author Response

First of all we would like to thank the reviewer for his supporting comments and constructive remarks, which have all been carefully considered to further enhance the clarity and quality of this manuscript. We have made every effort to satisfy the recommendations of the Reviewer and we are happy to make any further changes should it be necessary.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors propose a novel single-layer and low-profile harmonic transponder.

The paper is interesting and bring advancements to the field. There are some corrections, though:

1- The Abstract section is too short. The authors should explain a little bit more about their contributions.

2- Some figures need to be re-scaled.

Author Response

First of all we would like to thank the reviewer for his supporting comments and constructive remarks, which have all been carefully considered to further enhance the clarity and quality of this manuscript. We have made every effort to satisfy the recommendations of the Reviewer and we are happy to make any further changes should it be necessary.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

• Please add a sentence at the beginning of abstract as why this research has been conducted/what is the motivation?
• There is no achievement/performance mentioned of the proposed system in abstract. Please add the outcome (results) in the abstract.
• Inconsistency found in citing the reference. For example, at the beginning of Introduction, it starts 1, 2-4 then 7.
• The novelty of this paper is not very clear. Would you please add the novelty of the work either in abstract or in conclusion which differs from literature?
• A block diagram or framework of complete work of this paper is required to add at the beginning of chapter 2 so that readers can follow up the entire work has been done in this paper.
• In depth analysis and detail description is required to add under result section. Harmonic Transponder Characterization should also be added.
• Figure 8 and table 1 should be placed under result section.
• Please add further future research direction in Conclusion.

Author Response

First of all we would like to thank the reviewer for his supporting comments and constructive remarks, which have all been carefully considered to further enhance the clarity and quality of this manuscript. We have made every effort to satisfy the recommendations of the Reviewer and we are happy to make any further changes should it be necessary.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper have been improved. However, I still have some reservation. It is important to show the error bars in the simulations. It would be better if box plots can be used.

Author Response

Many thanks for the constructive comments, please find our reply to the remaining comment in the attached document and the new submission.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This reviewer has found still two comments to address. A block diagram of technical work was requested rather than organisation of the paper that tells which chapter shows what (at the end of introduction).

For the other comment, lack of detail description of Figure 9 and Table 1 is observed. Please also see some recent relevant papers particularly Harmonic Transponder Characterization. 

• A block diagram or framework of complete work of this paper is required to add at the beginning of chapter 2 so that readers can follow up the entire work has been done in this paper.
• In depth analysis and detail description is required to add under result section. Harmonic Transponder Characterization should also be added.

Author Response

Many thanks for the constructive comments, please find our reply to the remaining two comments in the attached document together with new submission.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf