Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper with title "" provides a significant contribution to the field but the following issues must be improved before considering the paper for publication:

1. Please check and correct some minimal grammar errors and typos found in the manuscript.

2. Please provide the topological characteristics of the matrices and vector uncertainties \Delta M, \Delta C and \Delta G.

 

3. Please provide a Lyapunov analysis for the disturbance observer in order to validate the convergence of this observer mathematically.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper called Non-singular terminal sliding mode control of robotic manipu- lator based on nonlinear disturbance observer by Keyou Guo, Peipeng Shi, Pengshuo Wang, Chengbo He and Haoze Zhang

The paper is very good and interesting. The main idea is clearly explained and I’m really impressed by the variety of research methods.

 

There are some major aspects I would like to highlight.

 

1)     It would be necessary to emphasize what is the main scope and purpose of the presented publication, it is difficult to find it in the text

2)     In the abstract presented, the importance of the publication should be more concisely described, including more extensive consideration of the methods, analyses and results of the research

3)     The publication is very well described in terms of theoretical.

4)     Rather, the publication reflects the nature of the engineering work.

5)     What is the future direction of development?

6)     The title of the publication would be worth rewording,

7)     Methodologies could be more clearly explained in some parts of the paper.

8)     What this work contributes to science.

9)     This conclusion is the end of chapter of 5. simulation results

10) The publication lacks a conclusion

 

The presented conclusions may be of fundamental importance, therefore they should be presented in a better light and the author’s should emphasize the original research contribution. I believe, that suggested amendments will significantly increase the relevance of the publication and will improve it. After applying all required changes, the paper is suitable for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Accept in present form