arg_1
stringlengths 4
5.08k
| round_1
float64 2
8
⌀ | ann_1
float64 1
2
⌀ | arg_2
stringlengths 8
2.19k
| round_2
float64 1
7
⌀ | ann_2
float64 1
2
⌀ | annotation_name
stringclasses 131
values | is_attacks
int64 0
1
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
For the 1407 dogs who were clear of SRB in February, they changed from being 100% clear to being 90.1% clear, with 1 in 10 of these dogs developing SRB they didn’t have previously. However, because of the dramatic improvement seen in the dogs that had SRB before the pandemic, the overall prevalence of SRB in the population decreased from 22% in February, to 17.2% in October (reported in the paragraph above). The numbers have been clarified in this section to help future readers, and additional discussion has been added around the overall decrease in SRB prevalence in both the abstract and in the discussion (lines 524-544).
| 2 | 1 |
L278-280 “There were 1,407 dogs who were clear of SRB at baseline in February 2020. When looking at SRB status in October, of 1,187 dogs who were left alone in October, 117 (9.9%) were reported to have shown at least one SRB”. In other words, 1407/1807 (78%) of dogs were clear of SRB in February and 90.1% in October. This is good news, and it is unclear for me why is it reported as bad news. The next section (l281-283) emphasizes that 55.7% of the dogs who were reported to show SRB in February were clear in October. This is a big improvement, I think.
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
Thank you, we’re glad you liked it! Further explanation to help interpret the figure has now been added.
| 2 | 1 |
L285 Figure 4. This is a great figure, thank you for including it. However, an explanation would be useful for those readers who are not familiar with this type of depicting.
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
Thank you for spotting that!
| 2 | 1 |
L291 The odds ratio (OR) is 5.38 and not 4.38 in Table 1.
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
This was explained further down in the section on the multi-variable model, but I have now moved the explanation to here, where it’s first mentioned and added some additional text also.
| 2 | 1 |
L293-295 “The final variable associated with October SRB status was the difference in the number of days dogs were left alone for between the February baseline and lockdown”.
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
Thank you, this has been added now.
| 2 | 1 |
OR was 0.81 here. Please explain the relationship between the variables.
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
Thank you! Looks like I read the z-value when I was typing. I promise this has been proof read, but it’s so easy to miss things, thank you so much!
| 2 | 1 |
L298 Table 1 legend: Add what bold indicates L307 The odds ratio (OR) is 4.97 in Table 1 and not
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
Since there were no non-significant variables it wasn’t necessary to distinguish the results.
| 2 | 1 |
L307 The odds ratio (OR) is 4.97 in Table 1 and not 3.60 Thank you!
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
This has been corrected, thank you.
| 2 | 1 |
L314 Table 2: bold is not used here although it was used in Table 1
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
Thank you for this, we were familiar with the paper but had missed that link. New text has been added here now to discuss this.
| 2 | 1 |
L333 table 3: same: bold is not used here
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
Agreed, this has been explicitly stated here now.
| 2 | 1 |
L382 Please refer to Flannigan and Dodman (2001) here (owner’s work schedule affects separation problems). Flannigan, G., & Dodman, N. H. (2001). Risk factors and behaviors associated with separation anxiety in dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 219(4), 460-466.
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
Thank you so much for your time and these comments, they have really helped to strengthen the paper and we really appreciate it.
| 2 | 1 |
L395-397 “This value is likely to be an underestimate” The underestimation has already occurred during the baseline.
| 1 | 2 |
ani12040482_perova
| 1 |
In order to address your feedback fully, we felt it necessary to split Figure 7. The data contained in the original Figure 7 is now split between Figure 7 (deals with CD14 and CD68 only) and Figure 8 (deals with CD11b and CD36).
| 2 | 1 |
Figure 7b is not very credible, when U937 become macrogphages adhere to the plate and assume the morphology of a macrophage. the figure is not clear and not well visible.
| 1 | 2 |
antiox11040683_makarova
| 1 |
Fig 7b. We have removed the Giemsa images and replaced with phase contrast images to better show cell morphology under our light microscope. We also include representative flow cytometric overlayed histograms, which display CD14 and CD68 expression changes between our Vector control and WT / CXXS BCAT1 cells. Included on these histograms is the mean fold MFI change (ratio).
| 2 | 1 |
The authors should also show the flow cytometers panels related to cd68 and cd14.
| 1 | 2 |
antiox11040683_makarova
| 1 |
Fig S4B. This is fully compensated.
| 2 | 1 |
Small comment, the supplementary Fig. S4B would need some compensation work....this would be better to correct before final approval for publication ( up to editor).
| 1 | 2 |
antiox11040683_makarova
| 1 |
Fig 4d. This is going in the correct direction.
| 2 | 1 |
Also the gating strategy on Fig. 4d ( is going in right direction), what I am missing here is the exclusion of dead cells?).
| 1 | 2 |
antiox11040683_makarova
| 1 |
Thank you for taking time to review are work and for giving us the opportunity to comment on the use of U937 cells as a limitation for the work presented. We have included a section dedicated to addressing this in the discussion section, along with supporting references.
| 2 | 1 |
The data presented by the authors are robust and interesting but are based on a single AML cell line, which is not a bonafide AML cell line (derived from the pleural effusion of a 37-year-old, White, male patient with histiocytic lymphoma, according to ATCC).
| 1 | 2 |
antiox11040683_makarova
| 1 |
We agree that transient analysis is important in designing a robot joint. However, the transient analysis requires relevant parameters of the robot arm be determined besides the parameters of the joint. The following sentence has been added at the end of Conclusions: "For future work we will develop variable stiffness techniques of this joint, and explore its application in a robot arm considering both kinetostatic and transient behaviors"
| 2 | 1 |
Transient analysis followed by reliability experiments/analysis/modeling of the proposed structure would be interesting and critical in aspect of joint application contrains. In my opoinion is should be added or explained in context of scheduled follow-up activities.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
The mentioned reference is focused on an analytical method for modeling large deflections in compliant mechanisms, while this work presents a method of enhancing the tensile strength of lamina emergent joints by using double-layer materials. As compared to Ref. [19] which focuses on concepts and demonstrations, this work mainly focuses on analytical modeling of one design concept and provides finite element and experimental validations. The following sentences have been added
| 2 | 1 |
The article being evaluated is an extension of the above cited reference, and the authors would be well advised as to summarize this article, in part, and to delineate what has changed as of 2019, i.e. put this in a paragraph and to explain the subsequent evolution since 2019.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
As to the second comment, Ref. [34] has been new added in the reference list and the following sentence has been added at the end of the second paragraph of Introduction: "Ref. [34] made a robot using double-layer LEMs, which is driven by magnetic force. This paper further discussed how to adjust the motion by changing different parameters of the mechanism". The following sentence has been added at the end of Conclusion: "For future work we will develop variable stiffness techniques of this joint, and explore its application in a robot arm considering both kinetostatic and transient behaviors."
| 2 | 1 |
Secondly what is missing in the article is in terms of application a clear delineation as to what benefits robotics accrue by the developments summarized in this article . What new capacities and abilities so created by this evolutionary jump Aside from that the article is solidly researched and is useful as a source of technology development
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
We have rewritten the conclusions and abstract, and added additional keywords.
| 2 | 1 |
Keywords are not sufficient after the abstract.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
at the beginning of the last paragraph of Introduction: "In this work, based on the design concept of improving the tensile stiffness of LET joints in Ref. [19], this paper proposed a DL-LET joint by fixing a layer of flexible H18 aluminum foil a LET joint. A theoretical model is derived for the DL-LET joint and verified by FEA and experimental results." The following sentences have been added in the first paragraph of Introduction to mention the base paper and the related work (more references have been added): "Finding suitable compliant joints [7] can be a key step in designing LEMs. Jacobsen et al. [8] first proposed the design concept of utilizing torsional deflection to obtain out-of-plane motions from planar structures, leading to a new group of compliant joints for LEMs called Lamina Emergent Torsional (LET) joints".
| 2 | 1 |
Work relevant to the research topic is not incorporated, i.e., the work done by other researchers / authors in this field are not incorporated.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
The references have been reformatted according to standard journal format.
| 2 | 1 |
References are not written in the standard journal format.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
We have added more relevant references in this version.
| 2 | 1 |
Work relevant to the research topic is not incorporated, i.e., the work done by other researchers / authors in this field are not incorporated.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
The contribution of this work with respect to the relevant work is further described in Introduction (as marked in the manuscript).
| 2 | 1 |
Please add more details regarding paper’s novelty, it is not very clear what are the novelties of this paper.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
The theoretical part has been extended in the modeling section (page 3).
| 2 | 1 |
Please add more details of how the theory from the first sections is applied in the results section and better detail the theoretical part, in this version the theoretical part is almost inexistent.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
The modeling section (page 3) has been extended to make it clear how the parameters were obtained.
| 2 | 1 |
Please detail how the parameters were obtained.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
The recommended and other relevant references have been added.
| 2 | 1 |
The state of the art it is very poor regarding representative papers, maybe the author could add the following publications: o Hybrid Data-Driven Fuzzy Active Disturbance Rejection Control for Tower Crane Systems, European Journal of Control, vol. 58, pp. 373-387-11, 2021. o Event-Triggered Adaptive Fuzzy Control for Stochastic Nonlinear Systems with Unmeasured States and Unknown Backlash-Like Hysteresis, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, doi 10.1109/TFUZZ.2020.2973950, pp. 1–19, 2020.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
Subsection 3.2 has been rewritten to add more details regarding the obtained results.
| 2 | 1 |
Please add more details regarding the obtained results.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
The following sentence has been added at the end of first paragraph of Conclusions to clarify disadvantage of DL-LET: “The DL-LET joint is vulnerable to delamination of the two layers.”
| 2 | 1 |
Add the both the advantages and the disadvantages of the proposed method. In the proposed manuscript only the advantages are presented.
| 1 | 2 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
Thank you for your explanation.
| 3 | 2 |
We agree that transient analysis is important in designing a robot joint. However, the transient analysis requires relevant parameters of the robot arm be determined besides the parameters of the joint. The following sentence has been added at the end of Conclusions: "For future work we will develop variable stiffness techniques of this joint, and explore its application in a robot arm considering both kinetostatic and transient behaviors"
| 2 | 1 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
The authors answered to all my concern in the second version of the paper. In conclusion the paper deserves to be acceped as contribution in Applied Science journal.
| 3 | 2 |
The following sentence has been added at the end of first paragraph of Conclusions to clarify disadvantage of DL-LET: “The DL-LET joint is vulnerable to delamination of the two layers.”
| 2 | 1 |
app12052642_perova
| 1 |
We have added all the new references suggested by Referee 2 on page 3 of the new manuscript. These includethe ones mentioned in our reply to Referee 1’s point 4 above, and all also the references: Corney98,Mekhov09,leroux10,Mekhov12,Niedenzu13,Lee14.
| 2 | 1 |
Other examples of many-atom-cavity continuous observation papers: W. Niedenzu, S. Schütz, H. Habibian, G. Morigi, and H. Ritsch, Phys. Rev. 88, 033830 (2013). I. B. Mekhov and H. Ritsch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 020403 (2009). J. F. Corney and G. J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. A 58, 2399 (1998). I. D. Leroux, M. H. Schleier-Smith, and V. Vuletić, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 073602 (2010).
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_makarova
| 1 |
Concerning the referee’s other point, about the suitability of this system to measure weak forces, we first note that the use of Bloch oscillations without a cavity is proving to be an excellent way to measure gravity (e.g. the experiments by G.M. Tino’s group).
| 2 | 1 |
The role of sensing may in the end be less important and could be downplayed a bit in the manuscript.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_makarova
| 1 |
Concerning the question of whether we have taken the effects of higher Bloch bands into effect, our numerical calculations do take this into account. The question of higher Bloch bands is a little subtle when it comes to our analytical calculation done in the Wannier-Stark picture. In the presence of the force, the true eigenstates of the system are no longer the Bloch states but the localized Wannier-Stark states. In the analytical calculation we restrict ourselves to just the ground band Wannier-Stark states. However, even with this approximation we find very good agreement between the numerical and analytical calculations.
| 2 | 1 |
What is the role of excitations to higher Bloch bands?
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_makarova
| 1 |
Done. We have re-written the first part of the abstract as: “In this paper we give a new description, in terms of optomechanics, of previous work on the problem of an atomic Bose-Einstein condensate interacting with the optical lattice inside a laser-pumped optical cavity and subject to a bias force such as gravity \cite{Ven09,Ped09,Gol14}. An atomic wave packet in a tilted lattice undergoes Bloch oscillations; in a highfinesse optical cavity the backaction of the atoms on the light leads to a time-dependent modulation of the intracavity lattice depth at the Bloch frequency which can in turn transport the atoms up or down the lattice.”
| 2 | 1 |
(1) It should be somehow mentioned more clearly (maybe in the abstract) that the idea is not completely new but work presents a new and more intutive picture of the system dynamics.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_makarova
| 1 |
We have added the following sentences on p3 (and four new references, including the one to Gangl’s work, in the bibliography): “A number of experiments have already demonstrated how the light transmitted by a cavity can be used to track the motion of atoms trapped inside \cite{Hood98,Hood00,Pinkse00}, and in particular, a theoretical analysis of the information stored in the frequency spectrum has been given in \cite{Gangl00}, showing that atomic motion introduces sidebands either side of the pump frequency. In our case, Bloch oscillations at angular frequency $\omega_{B}$ generates sidebands separated from the pump frequency by $\pm \omega_{B}$ (and harmonics thereof in the strong coupling regime).Because the Bloch frequency is proportional to the applied force $\omega_{B}= F d/\hbar$, where $d=\lambda/2$ is thelattice period, a detection of the spectrum of the transmitted light gives $F$ directly.”
| 2 | 1 |
(2) It is very helpful to connect cavity output spectra and forces. To my knowledge this was first discussed in: Gangl, M., EPJD, 8(1), 29-40. This should be mentioned.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_makarova
| 1 |
Actually, we do not claim that oscillation frequencies in general will be unaffected by the backaction. Rather, we claim that one particular frequency, the Bloch frequency, will be unaffected.
| 2 | 1 |
(3) The authors claim there should be no backaction of the field on the oscillation frequencies. This is somehow in contradiction with the eigenfrequency calculations (see Fig.4) in Horak, P.,Physical Review A, 61(3), 033609, 2000.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_makarova
| 1 |
Concerning the change in wavelength (and hence change in lattice constant) due to the refractive index of the gas, this effect is tiny. We consider it in section 6, on p17 and show that the correction to the refractive index is of order 10^-9 for our parameters. This is to be distinguished from the effective change in the cavity length which, due to the resonance effect, is substantial and is precisely what lies behind the amplitude modulation of the lattice.
| 2 | 1 |
Also the BEC will lead to an effective change of the cavity length and lattice constant, which should renormalize the wavelength and thus om_recoil.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_makarova
| 1 |
Yes we agree that there will be extra noise due to the open nature of the cavity, and we already refer to this on p3 of the Introduction: “The disadvantage of working in a cavity is that quantum measurement backaction, in the form of random fluctuations in the cavity field due to photons spontaneously leaking out of the cavity, heats up the cold atoms and limits the coherence time of the measurement \cite{Ven13}.” where the cited paper is one of ours [Prasanna Venkatesh, B.; O’Dell, D. H. J.; Bloch oscillations of cold atoms in a cavity: Effects of quantum noise. Phys. Rev. A 2013, 88, 013848] where we directlycalculated the heating effect for Bloch oscillating atoms in a cavity within the Bogoliubov approximation.
| 2 | 1 |
(a) any measurement of the output field will generate backaction onto the condensate (Mekhov, J. Phys. B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, 45(10), 102001). This will generate extra noise, but might also help as it reduces atom number uncertainty in the cavity.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_makarova
| 1 |
The coherence time for the many-particle Bloch oscillating state is in fact very hard to calculate (mainly because even the coherent part is time-dependent rather than stationary). It can, however, be estimated and so we have added in the following sentences on p3:“\textcolor{red}{The coherence time is particularly hard to calculate in the Bloch oscillating case \cite{Ven13} due to the time dependence introduced by the Bloch oscillations, especially in the presence of many particles, but it can be roughly estimated to be $\tau=\tau_{\mathrm{sp}}/(1+C)$ \cite{Ven09} at cavity resonance, where$\tau_{\mathrm{sp}}^{-1}=2 \gamma \vert \alpha \vert^2 \Omega_{0}^2/\Delta_{a}^2$ is the spontaneous emission rate at an antinode. The factors $\vert \alpha \vert^2$ and$\Delta_{a}$ are the mean number of cavity photons and the detuning of the laser from atomic resonance, respectively, and will be properly defined in the next section. The numerical value of $\tau$ for the parameters considered in this paper will be given in Section \ref{sec:metrology}. Of course, Bose-Einstein condensates can be continuously measured and used for sensingwithout a cavity, e.g.\ \cite{Ruostekoski98,Dalvit02,Saba05,Lee12,Java13}, but the cavity case is particularly interesting because it allows for a strong atom-light interaction even in the quantum regime.} “In addition, in Section 6 (paragraph 4, Pg 18) we have provided further details required to estimate the coherence time for the parameters used in the paper. We find thatcoherence times of up to a couple of seconds (many thousands of Bloch oscillation periods) are possible
| 2 | 1 |
(b) There will be heating limiting the available measurement time.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_makarova
| 1 |
We have added all the new references suggested by Referee 2 on page 3 of the new manuscript. These includethe ones mentioned in our reply to Referee 1’s point 4 above, and all also the references: Corney98,Mekhov09,leroux10,Mekhov12,Niedenzu13,Lee14.
| 2 | 1 |
There are other papers that link BECs, sensing and continuous quantum measurement process (in the absence of a cavity) M. Saba, T. A. Pasquini, C. Sanner, Y. Shin, W. Ketterle, and D. E. Pritchard, Science 307, 1945 (2005).
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_perova
| 1 |
Concerning the referee’s other point, about the suitability of this system to measure weak forces, we first note that the use of Bloch oscillations without a cavity is proving to be an excellent way to measure gravity (e.g. the experiments by G.M. Tino’s group). The sensitivity of their measurements, after many years of development, are only one order of magnitude above our estimated sensitivity, and their measurements take one hour whereas ours should take one second which means it might have applications in rather different situations (e.g. local gravity mapping while flying). Our work is very much still in progress and this paper will not, we hope, be our final word on this subject. Indeed, we point out a possible way forward in the last section that builds on the insight gained from the optomechanics analogy. It seems likely that the homodyne phase measurement regime, where backaction can be reduced, will likely be more favourable when it comes to absolute sensitivity than photon counting type measurement we focus on at the moment. For these reasons we would like to keep the measurement aspects of the paper intact: we would like to advertise them and, perhaps, be a little provocative.
| 2 | 1 |
The link to the sensing of weak forces (in this case gravity) is interesting, but I am not convinced whether this is a practical approach. The estimated accuracy is $10^6$ that does not sound great.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_perova
| 1 |
Concerning the question of whether we have taken the effects of higher Bloch bands into effect, our numerical calculations do take this into account. The question of higher Bloch bands is a little subtle when it comes to our analytical calculation done in the Wannier-Stark picture. In the presence of the force, the true eigenstates of the system are no longer the Bloch states but the localized Wannier-Stark states. In the analytical calculation we restrict ourselves to just the ground band Wannier-Stark states. However, even with this approximation we find very good agreement between the numerical and analytical calculations.
| 2 | 1 |
What is the role of excitations to higher Bloch bands?
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_perova
| 1 |
Concerning the question of radiationpressure forces, we take them into account on the atoms but not on the mirrors.
| 2 | 1 |
Have the effects of radiation pressure forces, etc., taken into account?
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_perova
| 1 |
Done. We have re-written the first part of the abstract as: “In this paper we give a new description, in terms of optomechanics, of previous work on the problem of an atomic Bose-Einstein condensate interacting with the optical lattice inside a laser-pumped optical cavity and subject to a bias force such as gravity \cite{Ven09,Ped09,Gol14}. An atomic wave packet in a tilted lattice undergoes Bloch oscillations; in a highfinesse optical cavity the backaction of the atoms on the light leads to a time-dependent modulation of the intracavity lattice depth at the Bloch frequency which can in turn transport the atoms up or down the lattice.”
| 2 | 1 |
(1) It should be somehow mentioned more clearly (maybe in the abstract) that the idea is not completely new but work presents a new and more intutive picture of the system dynamics.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_perova
| 1 |
We have added the following sentences on p3 (and four new references, including the one to Gangl’s work, in the bibliography): “A number of experiments have already demonstrated how the light transmitted by a cavity can be used to track the motion of atoms trapped inside \cite{Hood98,Hood00,Pinkse00}, and in particular, a theoretical analysis of the information stored in the frequency spectrum has been given in \cite{Gangl00}, showing that atomic motion introduces sidebands either side of the pump frequency. In our case, Bloch oscillations at angular frequency $\omega_{B}$ generates sidebands separated from the pump frequency by $\pm \omega_{B}$ (and harmonics thereof in the strong coupling regime).Because the Bloch frequency is proportional to the applied force $\omega_{B}= F d/\hbar$, where $d=\lambda/2$ is thelattice period, a detection of the spectrum of the transmitted light gives $F$ directly.”
| 2 | 1 |
(2) It is very helpful to connect cavity output spectra and forces. To my knowledge this was first discussed in: Gangl, M., EPJD, 8(1), 29-40. This should be mentioned.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_perova
| 1 |
Actually, we do not claim that oscillation frequencies in general will be unaffected by the backaction. Rather, we claim that one particular frequency, the Bloch frequency, will be unaffected. The Horak paper shows that Bloch energies (i.e. eigenmodes for a particle in a periodic potential…not to be confused with the Bloch oscillation frequency) will be changed by the backaction. This is because the presence of atoms in the cavity shifts the cavity resonance and hence the depth of the intracavity lattice: the Bloch energies are dependent on the potential depth. This change in potential depth due to backaction is fully included in our treatment. However, a change in the depth of a periodic potential does not change the Bloch frequency because this depends on the lattice’s spatial period, not the depth. Because this key aspect of our treatment can clearly lead to confusion we have modified the following sentence in the conclusions on p19, and added the reference to Horak’s paper: “Chief among these is that the backaction does not alter the frequency of the Bloch oscillations. By contrast, in the harmonic oscillator case there is the so-called optical spring effect which gives a dependence of oscillator frequency on field amplitude and detuning. To be clear, other motional frequencies are altered: because the intracavity lattice depth is modulated by the backaction this will affect certain types of atomic motion, for example the oscillation frequency of an atom about the bottom of one of the potential minima \cite{Horak00}. Nevertheless, the Bloch oscillation frequency is robust against this depth modulation because it only depends on the lattice period, not its depth.” Concerning the change in wavelength (and hence change in lattice constant) due to the refractive index of the gas, this effect is tiny. We consider it in section 6, on p17 and show that the correction to the refractive index is of order 10^-9 for our parameters. This is to be distinguished from the effective change in the cavity length which, due to the resonance effect, is substantial and is precisely what lies behind the amplitude modulation of the lattice.
| 2 | 1 |
(3) The authors claim there should be no backaction of the field on the oscillation frequencies. Also the BEC will lead to an effective change of the cavity length and lattice constant, which should renormalize the wavelength and thus om_recoil. This is somehow in contradiction with the eigenfrequency calculations (see Fig.4) in Horak, P.,Physical Review A, 61(3), 033609, 2000.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_perova
| 1 |
Yes we agree that there will be extra noise due to the open nature of the cavity, and we already refer to this on p3 of the Introduction: “The disadvantage of working in a cavity is that quantum measurement backaction, in the form of random fluctuations in the cavity field due to photons spontaneously leaking out of the cavity, heats up the cold atoms and limits the coherence time of the measurement \cite{Ven13}.” where the cited paper is one of ours [Prasanna Venkatesh, B.; O’Dell, D. H. J.; Bloch oscillations of cold atoms in a cavity: Effects of quantum noise. Phys. Rev. A 2013, 88, 013848] where we directlycalculated the heating effect for Bloch oscillating atoms in a cavity within the Bogoliubov approximation. Following the referee’s suggestion we have added the reference to Mekhov’s paper.The coherence time for the many-particle Bloch oscillating state is in fact very hard to calculate (mainly because even the coherent part is time-dependent rather than stationary). It can, however, be estimated and so we have added in the following sentences on p3:“\textcolor{red}{The coherence time is particularly hard to calculate in the Bloch oscillating case \cite{Ven13} due to the time dependence introduced by the Bloch oscillations, especially in the presence of many particles, but it can be roughly estimated to be $\tau=\tau_{\mathrm{sp}}/(1+C)$ \cite{Ven09} at cavity resonance, where$\tau_{\mathrm{sp}}^{-1}=2 \gamma \vert \alpha \vert^2 \Omega_{0}^2/\Delta_{a}^2$ is the spontaneous emission rate at an antinode. The factors $\vert \alpha \vert^2$ and$\Delta_{a}$ are the mean number of cavity photons and the detuning of the laser from atomic resonance, respectively, and will be properly defined in the next section. The numerical value of $\tau$ for the parameters considered in this paper will be given in Section \ref{sec:metrology}. Of course, Bose-Einstein condensates can be continuously measured and used for sensingwithout a cavity, e.g.\ \cite{Ruostekoski98,Dalvit02,Saba05,Lee12,Java13}, but the cavity case is particularly interesting because it allows for a strong atom-light interaction even in the quantum regime.} “In addition, in Section 6 (paragraph 4, Pg 18) we have provided further details required to estimate the coherence time for the parameters used in the paper. We find thatcoherence times of up to a couple of seconds (many thousands of Bloch oscillation periods) are possible
| 2 | 1 |
(b) There will be heating limiting the available measurement time. as the time scale can be faster than om_recoil, it could limit the measurement time to a fairly short period. Some rough estimate on the time scales should be added. In particular for the blue detuned case not only the average momentum but also the momentum spread will grow.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010002_perova
| 1 |
The review article by W Nakel and C. T. Whelan you refer to do indeed tackle the relativistic regime but at the expense of a huge amount of numerical work.
| 2 | 1 |
The authors did not mention this method for discussions in the manuscript. In earlier publications [Physics Reports 315 (1999) 409 and related references], a fully relativistic distorted-wave Born approximation (rDWBA) has been developed to describe the relativistic ionization processes.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_makarova
| 1 |
The work of W Nakel and C. T. Whelan is devoted to study heavy atoms but Our work is aimed to study analytically the hydrogen atom, we believe that such a comparison is impossible.
| 2 | 1 |
The RPWBA method in the manuscript should be compared with the previous rDWBA theory.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_makarova
| 1 |
We are not in a position to compare with these works since they are devoted to heavy atoms.
| 2 | 1 |
Again in earlier publications [Physics Reports 315 (1999) 409 and related references], there are existing experiments of triple differential cross sections for relativistic K-shell ionization of Ag, Au, and so on. The authors did not mention these experimental works in the manuscript.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_makarova
| 1 |
Points (i) and (ii) have been corrected and changed following to the referee’s amendments.
| 2 | 1 |
(ii) There are repeated Bibliography like ref. 11 and ref. 31.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_makarova
| 1 |
A major revision of the paper has been carried out to take all the comments, suggestions and english corrections into account.
| 2 | 1 |
In addition, I do believe that several figures could be combined in order to minimize journal space.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_makarova
| 1 |
The changes is made in the text.
| 2 | 1 |
Page 9:* "experimental one" -> "experimental ones"
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_makarova
| 1 |
The review article by W Nakel and C. T. Whelan you refer to do indeed tackle the relativistic regime but at the expense of a huge amount of numerical work. So, we think that presenting for the first time a work that incorporates fully analytical results and QED formalism is interesting to the scientific community. The work of W Nakel and C. T. Whelan is devoted to study heavy atoms but Our work is aimed to study analytically the hydrogen atom, we believe that such a comparison is impossible. Another difference that makes comparison difficult is that the work of W Nakel and C. T. Whelan uses coplanar asymmetric geometry while in our work we use coplanar symmetric geometry.
| 2 | 1 |
The authors did not mention this method for discussions in the manuscript. The RPWBA method in the manuscript should be compared with the previous rDWBA theory. At least the authors should mention the differences of the two methods and how far the RPWBA can be compared to rDWBA? In earlier publications [Physics Reports 315 (1999) 409 and related references], a fully relativistic distorted-wave Born approximation (rDWBA) has been developed to describe the relativistic ionization processes.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_perova
| 1 |
We are fully aware that the mainstream trend is to study heavy atoms. But some fundamental processes have not until now been investigated fully and analytically and it is our very humble belief that such a fundamental work must be presented to the international scientific community. We are not in a position to compare with these works since they are devoted to heavy atoms.
| 2 | 1 |
Again in earlier publications [Physics Reports 315 (1999) 409 and related references], there are existing experiments of triple differential cross sections for relativistic K-shell ionization of Ag, Au, and so on. The authors did not mention these experimental works in the manuscript. It would be nice if the RPWBA method in the manuscript can be compared with the experiments.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_perova
| 1 |
Points (i) and (ii) have been corrected and changed following to the referee’s amendments.
| 2 | 1 |
The authors have not carefully proofread this manuscript. Evidences of this includes (i) some errors in English typing, e.g. line 27 and line 119: it should be ‘plane wave …’ instead of ‘plan wave …’. Line between 33 and 34: it should be ‘The scattered positron and ejected electron …’ instead of ‘The scattered electron and ejected positron …’. (ii) There are repeated Bibliography like ref. 11 and ref. 31.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_perova
| 1 |
As you requested, we have made all necessary changes in our manuscript. A major revision of the paper has been carried out to take all the comments, suggestions and english corrections into account. We believe that the paper has been significantly improved.
| 2 | 1 |
In addition, I do believe that several figures could be combined in order to minimize journal space.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_perova
| 1 |
The changes is made in the text.
| 2 | 1 |
Page 9:* "experimental one" -> "experimental ones"
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4010010_perova
| 1 |
We added references to the Wolf and Tourrencin and A. Peters, K.Y. Chung and S. Chu articles. The latter of these articles does not address the quantum corrections 2.
| 2 | 1 |
The first example is the result announced in Equation (4), concerning the phase shift due to the gravity gradient gamma. This effect was first calculated by Wolf and Tourrencin Physics Letters A 251 (1999) pp 241–246 and discussed with more details in A. Peters, K.Y. Chung and S. Chu, Metrologia 2001, 38, 25–61.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
The referee implies that the leading term is not a quantum correction owing to the cancellation of a numerator proportional to hbar and a denominator in the spatial phase factor that is also proportional to hbar. This is, is some respect, a question of semantics, and has a long history in discussions of quantum effects in atom interferometry. Basically this term is a Doppler shift, which is clearly of classical origin, with no need to impose arguments related to cancellations of hbars in numerators and denominators. In the approach we follow using the Wigner representation, there are no numerators and denominators; the leading term has no hbar.
| 2 | 1 |
Moreover, the authors call this effect a quantum correction probably because it is proportional to hbar but it would be more clear to explain that, the leading term of the gravitation phase being independent of hbar because of a cancellation (hbar appears in the numerator and denominator of the quantity giving the phase), the term linear in gamma is also proportional to the recoil velocity which itself is proportional to hbar.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
The density matrix in the Wigner representation has been widely used in problems related to the recoil effect and laser cooling. For some mysterious reason it hasn’t used in much in problems involving atom interferometry. Of course there are hundreds of articles (maybe more) and books on the Wigner representation; however here we are concerned mainly with its application to calculations involving atom interferometry. The only examples we know of are the ones referred to in the paper.
| 2 | 1 |
A second example is the equation 9b for Wigner function: the associated quotation is ref. 17 by one of the authors and M.A. Kasevich in Phys Rev A (2006). A brief search on the web proves that a similar equation was used by Hongyi Fan Phys Rev A 656, 064102 (2002) who quotes two references dating from 1984 and a book published in 1994. I am not sufficiently aware of the use f Wigner function but I am sure that there are better and more useful references to quote in addition to ref 17!
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
The article by Fam is devoted to the use of Wigner representation for the two-particle density matrix, which is outside the scope of our article. Moreover, in contrast to that article, we do not use an expansion of the equation for the Wigner distribution in powers of hbar. For both these reasons, we do not include a reference on this article 5.
| 2 | 1 |
A second example is the equation 9b for Wigner function: the associated quotation is ref. 17 by one of the authors and M.A. Kasevich in Phys Rev A (2006). A brief search on the web proves that a similar equation was used by Hongyi Fan Phys Rev A 656, 064102 (2002) who quotes two references dating from 1984 and a book published in 1994. I am not sufficiently aware of the use f Wigner function but I am sure that there are better and more useful references to quote in addition to ref 17!
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
As far as we can tell, the phi_Q term is not related directly to the spreading of the wave-packet. It arises as a quantum correction to phase factors during periods of free evolution. At this point, we do not have any other physical interpretation. We do not know yet how this term would manifest itself in the other approaches (path-integrals, ABCD theorem and etc.). This remains an interesting topic for future work, but is outside the scope of our article.
| 2 | 1 |
In my opinion, phi_Q is the real quantum correction due to the spreading of the wavepacket during propagation. If I am correct, this should be explained.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
We added a paragraph re-emphasizing the choice of x_C, x_qC and x_QC just after Equation (99); these terms do not have to the same leading terms in T^2.
| 2 | 1 |
The meaning of the three x_C, x_qC and x_QC (Equation (99)) is far from obvious but it is very surprising that the leading term in T^2 is different?
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
Several additional paragraphs have been added near the figures to help explain the plots appearing in these figures. For the stationary atom case, the limits on y_{m0} are determined from inequality (106) and it is indeed possible for y_{m0} to be less than y_{min}. The manner in which we arrived at the regions of validity of the approximations is now described in more detail.
| 2 | 1 |
The paper contains only one figure with 28 panels presenting the results of the calculations. I think that this figure is very difficult to read! I do not understand clearly why results are plotted with y < y_min if this not physical: please explain!
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
In the article we obtained results that are specific for the parameters of the atom interferometer and test mass’ shape and trajectory. We think for the each case one should generate one figure 3 to answer all questions regarding the validity and role of different parts of the phase and approximate expressions for them. Instead of using a lot of dashed curves, we decided to use a panel of figures. Although each plot is difficult to read at “normal” magnification, the online reader can easily magnify any plot when accessing the article in PDF format. We have added a note to this effect.
| 2 | 1 |
The paper contains only one figure with 28 panels presenting the results of the calculations. I think that this figure is very difficult to read! I do not understand clearly why results are plotted with y < y_min if this not physical: please explain!
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
We added a schematic figure of the geometry of our problem.
| 2 | 1 |
A figure explaining the geometry of the experiment would also help.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
In the paragraph after Equation (30) we added a list of requirements that will insure that the signal does not depend critically on the initial atomic state phase space distribution. These requirements minimize the corrections arising from diffraction to which the referee refers 11.
| 2 | 1 |
The process is calculated as if the gravitational forces can be neglected during the diffraction laser pulses. This is probably an excellent approximation but please comment it!
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
Difficulties related to stray interferometers exist and are important, but are not addressed in our paper, as the referee points out. We are assuming that the effects can be minimized in a fountain geometry using a variety of experimental techniques. In any event, a discussion of these effects is beyond what we are able to discuss in this article.
| 2 | 1 |
The fountain is assumed to be exactly symmetric (see line after Equation (100)). It is well known that with symmetric fountains diffraction with retro-reflected laser beams produces stray interferometers... Minor Remarks
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
The word “potential” has been changed to “acceleration” in the sentence after Equation (1).
| 2 | 1 |
I noted an error after Equation (1): ... the gravitational potential is constant... I assume that the authors meant acceleration g, not the potential.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
We know that this paper is “equation-rich”, but we have tried to provide some physical guidance for the reader.
| 2 | 1 |
The paper is quite difficult to read, because of very many bulky equations. I do not see how to reduce the number of equations but I think that some more comments would help the reader.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
A figure has been added to clarify the geometry of the problem. Moreover, additional discussion of the trajectories involved are now given in paragraphs that were added to help explain the plots given in Figures 2 and 3.
| 2 | 1 |
The relative location of the test mass to the cold atom cloud should be clearly stated during the calculation, as the gravitational force is a vector. If the test mass is not located in the direction of the evolution trajectory of the atom cloud, the applicability of some formulas (e.g. Equation (3)) need to be verified. It will be helpful to the readers if a figure is provided to show the locations.
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
The wave function cannot be used when we know only some statistical properties of the initial phase space distribution.
| 2 | 1 |
The cloud is assumed to be characterized by a Wigner distribution function. What are the advantages to use Wigner distribution function instead of wave function?
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
We thank the referee for pointing out this additional reference and have added it to the references.
| 2 | 1 |
In the Introduction, quite a lot of papers are cited concerning the applications of atom interferometer in varies fields. Just for the note of the authors, there are some new applications of atom interferometer, e.g., in the accurate measurement of the quadratic Zeeman coefficient [J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys., 47(1): 015001, 2014].
| 1 | 2 |
atoms4020014_perova
| 1 |
As suggested by the reviewer, the non-pertinent references has been checked throughout the manuscript and unnecessary references are removed too.
| 2 | 1 |
The manuscript is very long: it contains a lot of information and many references not always pertinent to EPS characterization.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
As suggested by the reviewer, now the title include the production optimization too and the new title is “Optimization and characterization of a novel exopolysaccharide from Bacillus haynesii CamB6 for food applications”.
| 2 | 1 |
Optimization of production constitutes an important part not mentioned in the title.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
As suggested by the reviewer, the acceptability for food application has now been mentioned with appropriate refences (Nicolaus et al., 2010; Kambourova et al., 2018; Gongi et al., 2022) in the revised version of the manuscript.
| 2 | 1 |
Acceptability for food applications was not discussed.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
According to reviewer´s suggestion, the language of the manuscript is thoroughly revised.
| 2 | 1 |
Articles (mostly definite, but also indefinite) are often missing and sometimes superfluous.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
As suggested by the reviewer, the consistent of the word had been checked throughout.
| 2 | 1 |
EPS vs. EPSs in plural form should be consistent throughout.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
Constant abbreviation had been checked throughout in the revised version of the manuscript.
| 2 | 1 |
Use a consistent abbreviation (l or L) for liter (including milliliter and microliter) throughout.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
Accoding to the suggestion of the reviewer, Table 1 is revised and both coded – noncoded values are now included.
| 2 | 1 |
l. 160 There is no coded value in Table 1.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
Both the tables (table 1 and table 2) have been placed in the proper place where it expected in the revised manuscript.
| 2 | 1 |
l. 165 Table 2 where Table 1 expected
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
The suggested correction has been done in the revised version of the manuscript
| 2 | 1 |
l. 169-170 thirty instead of thirteen ?
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
The corrected has been made now.
| 2 | 1 |
l. 177 i instead of 0 in second term?
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
The revision has been made as suggested.
| 2 | 1 |
l. 228 GPC defined on l. 231
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
as suggested by the reviewer, PEG has been defined in the revised version of the manuscript
| 2 | 1 |
l. 230 PEG undefined
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
The volume is now added in the revised version of the manuscript.
| 2 | 1 |
l. 247 Volume of 0.2 mM ethanolic DPPH solution?
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
Suggestion has been included in the revised version of the manuscript throughout.
| 2 | 1 |
255, 286, and 441 et al.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
This to kindly mention to the reviewer, the map is the collection site of the EPS producing Bacillus haynesii CamB6. This is a first such report from this collection site, the map is necessary to keep in the manuscript.
| 2 | 1 |
Figure 1 What is the significance of the tick mark labels on the maps? Are these maps really necessary?
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
Figure 2 has been modified as suggested by the reviewer.
| 2 | 1 |
Figure 2 No x-axis label Units not specified
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
As suggested by the reviewer, Figure 3 is now modified with specified units of the axes and also in the figure legend.
| 2 | 1 |
Figure 3
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
All the Suggestion has been included in the figure legend of revised version of the manuscript
| 2 | 1 |
417 and 432 30.0 instead of 3.0 ?
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
To avoid the redundancy of the figures as suggested by the reviewer, figure 4 is removed from the revised version of the manuscript.
| 2 | 1 |
Units are not specified on the axes labels or in the legend. Figure 4 This figure is redundant as it gives the same information as Figure 3. Tick label values for glucose and yeast extract are different.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
As per the suggestion given by the reviewer, section numbering has been checked thoroughly in the revised version of the manuscript
| 2 | 1 |
433, 434, 454, 458, and 507 First section 3.6 (and its subsections) should be section 3.5.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
This has been checked now and revised.
| 2 | 1 |
l. 471, 600, 678, and 718 Reference format is different; corresponding references could be missing in the list.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
We performed 2D-NMR analysis , which allows us to determine exactly the α-Manp linkage, which is the major sugar component, and the β- structure of Galp and Glucp.
| 2 | 1 |
l. 480 Why was linkage analysis not performed?
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
This is a heteropolysaccharide composed of 3 different sugars as determined for HPLC, which is highly common in this kind of polysaccharides isolated from bacterial strains (10.3390/foods11020156)
| 2 | 1 |
Figure 6 Bacterial EPSs are normally composed of repeating units. How can the authors ascertain that mannose does not come from mannans in yeast extract? A 2D COSY spectrum would be necessary to confirm the assignments made on the 1D: e.g., H2- Man is not normally found in the range 3.2-3.5 ppm (the statement ll. 495-496 is wrong). The abbreviation for glucose is Glc.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
There are several earlier report where different concentration of yeast extract is added to the culture media for optimized EPS production, and the resultant EPS also concisted of mannan.
| 2 | 1 |
Figure 6 Bacterial EPSs are normally composed of repeating units. How can the authors ascertain that mannose does not come from mannans in yeast extract? A 2D COSY spectrum would be necessary to confirm the assignments made on the 1D: e.g., H2- Man is not normally found in the range 3.2-3.5 ppm (the statement ll. 495-496 is wrong). The abbreviation for glucose is Glc.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
Several 2D-NMR spectra were performed to confirm 1H and 13C chemical shift of EPS structure, and their analysis was added to the manuscript.
| 2 | 1 |
Figure 6 Bacterial EPSs are normally composed of repeating units. How can the authors ascertain that mannose does not come from mannans in yeast extract? A 2D COSY spectrum would be necessary to confirm the assignments made on the 1D: e.g., H2- Man is not normally found in the range 3.2-3.5 ppm (the statement ll. 495-496 is wrong). The abbreviation for glucose is Glc.
| 1 | 2 |
biom12060834_makarova
| 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.