Next Article in Journal
Total Roman {3}-Domination: The Complexity and Linear-Time Algorithm for Trees
Next Article in Special Issue
On the Approximation by Balázs–Szabados Operators
Previous Article in Journal
A Multi-Strategy Marine Predator Algorithm and Its Application in Joint Regularization Semi-Supervised ELM
Previous Article in Special Issue
Using Parameter Elimination to Solve Discrete Linear Chebyshev Approximation Problems
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Solving the Coriolis Vibratory Gyroscope Motion Equations by Means of the Angular Rate B-Spline Approximation

by Mikhail Basarab 1,* and Boris Lunin 2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Submission received: 22 November 2020 / Revised: 28 January 2021 / Accepted: 31 January 2021 / Published: 2 February 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Approximation Theory and Methods 2020)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I think the readers of this journal will appreciate the results of this manuscript.  Generally speaking, the manuscript is well written, the material is judiciously divided and organized and correct from scientific point of view. This is also a quite useful reference.  The subject matter is interesting because the paper gives access to the results of this particular research.

Some changes are, however, necessary. For these reasons I can recommend the acceptance of this paper after some corrections.

 

Before that the Editor makes a decision, I suggest that the authors emphasize take into account the following corrections

 

  1. Section 2, Preliminary remark can be improved with some comments.
  2. The section Conclusions will be point out the original results of the paper and can be extended to highlight the contributions.
  3. Section 4 and 5 must be improved in order to explain more clear the contribution of the author and the existing state of art.
  4. I think the authors need to emphasize more clearly the contribution of the manuscript from a scientific point of view.

If the author takes into account these observations the work can be published. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The authors are grateful to the reviewer for useful comments. The necessary corrections were made.

1.Preliminary remark was added in Section 2 (lines 58-69); Fig. 1 was correspondingly improved.

2-4. The authors tried to point out the original results and explain more clear the contribution of the work by adding the following material:

  • lines 91-95 (Section 3);
  • lines 131-135 (Section 4);
  • lines 190-199 (Section 5);
  • some phrases emphasizing the authors' contribution in Conclusion;
  • new references [8-12].

Reviewer 2 Report

My comments are in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The authors are grateful to the reviewer for useful comments. The necessary corrections were made.

Back to TopTop