Developments of Waveguide Lasers by Femtosecond Laser Direct–Writing Technology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article is very informative and very well written. I have a few minor points to mention. 

 

1. Formatting: in line 125, there should be a space between the period and the “The”. Similarly, there should be a space after the period in line 149. There should be a space after [17]. There should be a space after (b,d) in the caption of Fig. 4. In the caption of Fig. 5, there should be a space before (b). The space at the end of the first sentence in line 237 is misplaced. Similar mistakes happen in line 424.
2. In Fig. 2, there are a few abbreviations. The full name of those should be given. Similarly, other figures have similar problems.
3. Grammar: do you mean “experimentally” instead of “experimental” in line 142. The “The” in line 191 should be “the”. In other words, the “T” should be in lower case. Considering rewriting the sentence in line 205. Considering rewriting the sentence in line 237.
4. In line 260, do you mean “Figure 7” instead of “Figure 1.7”?
5. Checking consistency. In section 3, there should be a space after q”3.” to be consistent with others. When citing figures, sometimes “Figure” is used, and sometimes“Fig.” is used. In line 418, there should a space between the number and the unit in order to be consistent with others.
6. Sometimes, an unnecessary hyphen is added to the word, for instance, “in-crease” in line 287, “trans-mission” in line 308, and “ap-plication” in line 316.
7. About the reference, the page number or volume number is not given. Sometimes, the both starting page number and ending page number are given; sometimes only the starting page number is given.
8. The article lists most facts. However, what is lacking is what causes those facts.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

As shown in the previous session.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript titled "1 μm ultrafast fiber lasers and waveguide lasers by femtosecond laser direct-writing: Applications and developments" provides a comprehensive overview of the advancements in the field of ultrafast lasers, particularly focusing on 1 μm wavelength applications. The authors have successfully covered a broad spectrum of topics, ranging from the development process to the practical applications of these lasers. The paper is well-structured, with a clear abstract, introduction, detailed methodology, and a conclusion that encapsulates the essence of the research. The language used is scientific and appropriate for the audience, and the figures and tables are informative and relevant.

1. While the figures are informative, it would be beneficial to include error bars or confidence intervals in the graphical representation of the data to provide a clearer understanding of the variability and reliability of the results.

2. Although the paper has a substantial list of references, it would be advantageous to include more recent studies to ensure that the paper's content is up-to-date with the latest research trends and findings in the field.

3. The methods section is comprehensive; however, additional details regarding the experimental setup, such as the specifications of the femtosecond laser used for direct writing, would provide greater transparency and reproducibility of the study.

4. While the paper highlights the advantages and applications of the technology, a more thorough discussion on the limitations or challenges faced during the research could provide a balanced view and potential areas for future research.

5. Consider providing supplementary material, such as videos or additional images, to illustrate the dynamic behavior of the lasers or the process of femtosecond laser direct writing. This can be particularly helpful for readers to better understand the operational principles and practical applications.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language used in the manuscript is generally of high quality, with clear and concise sentences that effectively convey the research findings and discussions. The terminology is appropriate for the scientific field, and the authors have made a commendable effort to ensure that the text is comprehensible to readers who are specialists in photonics.

Ensure that technical terms are used consistently throughout the paper. For example, if "femtosecond laser" is used in one section, avoid using "fs laser" in another without proper explanation.The manuscript predominantly uses the passive voice, which is common in scientific writing. However, consider using the active voice in certain sections, especially in the introduction and conclusion, to engage the reader more effectively.Some sentences could be simplified to enhance readability. Complex sentences, while not incorrect, can sometimes obscure the main point. Breaking these down into shorter sentences might help in conveying the message more clearly.There are instances where the use of conjunctions could be improved to ensure that the flow of ideas is smooth and logical. For example, "However," "Therefore," and "Moreover" can be used to better connect sentences and clarify the relationships between different ideas.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author‘s response is acceptable’

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language quality in the provided document is high, with clear and concise scientific communication. The terminology is used appropriately, and the text is well-structured, indicative of a well-edited scholarly article.