Actively MEMS-Based Tunable Metamaterials for Advanced and Emerging Applications
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
- There are many grammatical and lexical errors, paper needs significant improvement.
- Quality of the figures should be improved.
- Line 11: the world “molecules” is not suitable here.
- Line 28: How “optical properties”? they are EM properties.
- Line 38-40: please rephrase the sentence.
- Line 51: the word “roadmap” is used for future plan/ vision.
- It would be beneficial if the authors add comparison tables for useful parameters/ figure of merits.
Author Response
Please refer to the attached response letter and revised manuscript.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Below I will discuss a few comments and suggestions, which hopefully can help the authors improve their paper.
- The idea of sketching a global overview of the literature on the development of MEMS-based metamaterial based on various types of actuators is very good and holds high potential; but data are not well-discussed enough to build a coherent paper. For instance, the author can expand section 2.5 (summary). There are not many conclusions are being drawn from the 120 past works in the field. This paper could be a bright opportunity to bring in a new vision based on lessons learned from a decade of research on the field.
-The quality of the figures needs to be improved. Almost all figures are blurred. Also, it is the authors’ responsibility to obtain required permission for the figures that have a copyright issue.
-It is acceptable to cite your own works specialty if you are writing a review paper in the field of expertise, but here I found almost 31 self-citation which sounds unusual. I suggest you remove repeated works and try to consider others’ approaches and points of view.
Here are self-citations: 40-44-49-50-51-52-53-54-55-56-57-60-61-62-66-69-75-76-77-78-79-86-87-88-89-90-101-107-108-112-114
Author Response
Please refer to the attached response letter and revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for the revisions.
