Robust Predefined Time Stability of nth-Order Systems Subject to Deterministic Matched Disturbances

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A robust predefined-time stabilization approach is analyzed for thr n-th order systems subject to deterministic matched disturbances. This topic is interesting, and this paper is well-writen, but some minor revisions are needed, e.g.,

1)Where in line 247 should be where.

2)The differences between this manuscript and the existing literature should be stated clearly, especially with those related to controllor design to compare the advantage of others and the difference between this paper, e.g., “Active Disturbance Rejection Control for Delayed Electromagnetic Docking of Spacecraft in Elliptical Orbits.", "Reinforcement Learning-based Decision-Making for Spacecraft Pursuit-Evasion Game in Elliptical Orbits",etc.

3)It is recommended to revise all the figures to make it more understandable, as the font is too small.

4)As is known, controller perturbations widely exist in practical situations, so will you conseder non-fragile control (see: Spacecraft Attitude Control: A Linear Matrix Inequality Approach. Elsevier/Science Press ) in the current or future research?

5)I suggest that terms like "new" or "novel" should be deleted as they are meaningless in this paper.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

None

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The submitted manuscript is well-prepared regarding technical matters (such as rigorousness, complexity, proofs, etc.). The reviewer appreciates stating the main goals clearly. However, many formatting and language issues can be identified. Minor clarity issues can also be fixed.

Comments:

1) It might be interesting to provide readers with information on whether the proposed algorithms are suitable for single-variable systems (only) or if they can deal with multi-variable ones. In the latter case, there exist several exciting concepts that ought to be discussed (e.g., DOIs: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2962302, 10.1021/acsomega.1c02239, 10.1016/j.net.2022.11.013, 10.1177/00202940231193000, etc.).

2) English

- Style:

- - Line 2: "These requirements" (?) A plural might fit better therein.

- - Line 82: Do not finish the sentence before "When", i.e., use a comma instead of the full stop.

- Grammar and typos:

- - Lines 114 and 115: A comma is missing. Moreover, there is a typo "writen" therein.

- - Lines 117, 118, and many other places: A comma is missing again (after an introductory clause).

3) Formatting

- Line 86 (and also other places): Consider re-writing "n−th".

- Title of Figure 2: An extra spacing between "("and "5".

- Line 174 (and some other places): Do not use capitalized "E".

- Table 2: "B" should be in Italics.

- Line 289: Spacing between "5" and "second" is missing.

4) Eqs. (20) and (21): It is unclear why the second term on the left-hand side vanished.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf