A Survey of Planning and Learning in Games

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please find attached the reviewer comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

It seems to be appropriate as a review paper.
However, add "note" in short form to the table (see attached file).

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript has substantially improved from the previous version. The improvements made in sections especially 3,4 and the conclusion part are important to convey the information to the readers.

Reviewer understands the difficulty to respond to Point 1 remark in the previous revision. The answer to the reviewer is satisfactory. However, if the explanations can be included to the manuscript with a short summary in a few sentences, it would be helpful for the readers as well to show the complexity of a more detailed analysis for a survey paper.

In addition, for Figure 10, it could be more clear if a different color or a dashed line can be used for h and z vectors since they both looked merged.

Author Response

Point 1: Reviewer understands the difficulty to respond to Point 1 remark in the previous revision. The answer to the reviewer is satisfactory. However, if the explanations can be included to the manuscript with a short summary in a few sentences, it would be helpful for the readers as well to show the complexity of a more detailed analysis for a survey paper.

 

Response 1: An explanation was included in the manuscript as suggested (line 92-107 page 1-2)

 

Point 2: In addition, for Figure 10, it could be more clear if a different color or a dashed line can be used for h and z vectors since they both looked merged. 

 

Response 2: Figure 10 was changed in order to improve its readability (page 27)