Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In my opinion, the manuscript is not a scientific publication. The authors present simple calculations of the radioactive equilibrium and the parameters for obtaining .225Ac and other radionuclides in the Joyo fast reactor. Non-original separation methods have also been proposed. I don't see any sense in publishing this manuscript.

Of course, it can be published after conducting experiments, even with small Ra-226 and Th-230 targets. Then the parameters of a new method of obtaining Ac-225 and its separation from the target could be presented. You can also compare the experimental data with the authors' predictions.

Author Response

Thank you for your comment.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The study is significant and the results should be published. But the presentation and text editing need the careful revision.

Author Response

Thank you for your comment.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors presented a study under title of  Examination of Ac-225 production from Ra-226 or Th-230 using 2 fast reactor Joyo 

The study is good, but it needs a lot of clarification of the experimental part and methodology design

The introduction needs to be improved 

The discussion part should discuss the advantages of their methods over other methods

The authors has to discuss the availability of the target material worldwide and if there are other reactors similar to JOYO reactor that can do the same reactions

Author Response

Thank you very much for your important comments.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for reviewing our manuscript and offering valuable advice.

We have addressed your comments with point-by-point responses, and revised the manuscript accordingly.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I still believe that the work may make sense after conducting the experiments. I don't understand why the experiments were not carried out.

Author Response

Thank you for your comment.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Accept

Author Response

Thank you for accept.

We have corrected the English language.

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

I can accept the authors' arguments. The work can be published. I am just asking you to add these arguments in the conclusion

Author Response

Thank you for your comments.
Future experimental plans are described in the conclusion section.

Round 4

Reviewer 1 Report

Now the manuscript can be accepted