3D Graph-Based Individual-Tree Isolation (Treeiso) from Terrestrial Laser Scanning Point Clouds
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
I have a few recommended edits:
1. Lines 86 to 94 on page 2 should be deleted - they are instructions to authors as to what should be contained in an introduction. Obviously, these were left here by accident.
2. Lines 112 to 113 at the bottom of page 3. A statement is made that, "... the four additional plots to Xi and Hopkinson [38] are in bold." The plots are not emboldened in Table 1 as far as I can see.
3. Line 123 on page 4. I understand the use of "Mixed" as a noun, but I think it would read better if you stated it as "... the Mixed plot."
4. Lines 136 to 139 on page 4: These should be deleted as they are once again notes to authors about how to layout the Methods. As an aside I would generally recommend referring to this section as Methods rather than Methodology. I suppose this is a field of study but really what you are discussing is primarily a specific approach with comparison to one other approach.
5. Line 154 on page 5. The norm is stated with 0 in the superscript. This is in contrast to Equation 1 where the norm is stated with 0 in the subscript. Presumably these should all be superscripts to be consistent throughout.
6. Lines 190 to 191 on page 6. "... these larger clusters from the previous segmentation hereon referred to as segments below." Phew - the segments from the previous segmentation are no longer segments and the clusters are now segments? In all honesty I think I know what you are trying to say but this statement did bring me to a grinding halt to question myself as to whether I really did know what you were saying. Maybe you can find a better way to make this point?
7. Equations 5 and 6 on page 8. I can accept your notation here, but it seems awkward. In formal logic the exclusive disjunction between two sets is stated as follow: (R\Q) U (Q\R) this representing membership that is either in R (but not in Q) or in Q (but not in R). I think the following applies: Equation 5 after "the sum of " is just simply (Q\R)/Q and similarly Equation 6 would be (R\Q)/R ... unless I have missed something which is possible. The intersection statement is redundant, I think. In any event I would suggest that you restate these concepts in English after having introduced the equations and drop the note on lines 252 and 253.
8. It is too bad the colour schemes can't be made to match across the figures. It took me quite a while to line things up to confirm the points that you are making in the text. One has to concentrate on the shapes and tree locations in the understanding that the diagrams are oriented in the same direction. It might be helpful to point that out after having said the colours are assigned randomly.
9. Table 4 on Pages 13 and 14. Please ensure that the table is not split across pages. Also, I wonder why you did not consider the possibility of interactions amongst these factors rather than limiting your investigation to only one factor at a time?
I enjoyed reading your work. Thank you.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
1. I recommend that you can highlight your contributions of this paper in Section 1.
2.I recommend the authors provide a table that contains the overview of existing methods, and their accuracy, parameters, etc.
3.Please provide some SOTA approaches to prove the effectiveness your method.
4.In Table 4, How do you calculate Pearson's r?
5.In Table 2, How do you define these six parameters' values?
6.Some references could be considered to cite:
Zheng, J., Fu, H., Li, W., Wu, W., Yu, L., Yuan, S., ... & Kanniah, K. D. (2021). Growing status observation for oil palm trees using Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) images. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 173, 95-121.
de Paula Pires, R., Olofsson, K., Persson, H. J., Lindberg, E., & Holmgren, J. (2022).
Individual tree detection and estimation of stem attributes with mobile laser scanning along boreal forest roads. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 187, 211-224.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have revised this manuscript. From my point of view, these results are reasonable to me. So I basically accept it.
