CMOS Linear Laser Driver for Intermediate Frequency over Fiber (IFoF) Links
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is supposed to describe a laser linearizer structure. The English text is naive and contains many unnecessary explanations (i.e.: the linear concept explanation @pg2- r.51..) of some basic concepts. Most of all, it lacks many relevant aspects and indications, e.g.: what type of foundry process has been used? Where are the pre and post-layout simulations? What are the target values? What about power consumption, supply voltage and so on? What is the output power?........
The comparison in Table 1 is unfair as it lacks the bandwidth column! For example, ref.11 solution has a much more than double bandwidth, with a ten time lower area and double power consuption…
Most of all, the proposed circuit is quite basic, and no design considerations of any type is reported.
The introduction must be strongly revised. As it is, is quite confusing and unclearly organized. The structure in Fig.1 is a conventional transceiver, operating at RF and the figure is quite unnecessary.
Pg2 row 2 – discard??
Pg 3 row 92 -from the electrical point of view, the diode is a bipole … input and output resistances?
Pg4 r.118 What kind of process? Please, specify.
Pg5 – Figure 5 do not show any type of pad!
No dimensioning issues, simulations, expected results....?
The English Language is good enough .
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
1. As mentioned in the paper, IFoF necessitates low power consumption. Please highlight and provide the methodology for reducing power consumption compared to other works.
2. In Line 102, there is a mention of "an output impedance of 50 Ω". Could you explain where this "50 Ω" comes from?
3. In line 131, when you mention "optimizing connections", could you clarify what kind of efforts were implemented?
There is only a minor error in the form of the abbreviation that needs to be improved. For instance, instead of 'remote antenna units (RAUs)', please use capital letters for each word like 'Remote Antenna Units (RAUs)'.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
As follows from the text, the proposed amplifier has superior linearity. Yet, this fact is not reflected in Table I. Add the comparison where it is possible.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The changes introduced by the Authors satisfy all the issues identified in my previous review.
