Performance Evaluation of Maximum Ratio Combining Diversity Technology and Traditional System Based on Comprehensive Noise Analysis in Underwater Wireless Optical Communication

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The presentation of the manuscript is quiet well and provides an insight of the performance analysis of the UWOC link in the presence of noise under MRC scheme employing LAD and SAD. However, the reviewer has the following concerns that may help in improving the quality of the paper.

 

§  The communication is taking place in shallow water up to 200m depth; the background noise is generated by solar radiations as well. The effects of LAD and SAD in the presence of solar noise may be included/added in noises.

§  Monte Carlo simulation typically requires a large amount of computing power and is more complex and time-consuming. Are the assumptions made hold true for the real UWSN scenario? Please justify.

§  Is the adopted Monte Carlo simulation algorithm able to accurately simulate a focussed beam at the detection area?

The authors are suggested to cite the work as follows;

 

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9860895 

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10084904

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I think English is quite fine, However, It could be further improved.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Underwater Optical Wireless Communications is suitable area for Photonics. The auhtos study transmission of optical signals over underwater wireless channel and give some BER comparison when MRC is implemented with SISO configurations. The results are obtained by Monte CArslo simulations without analytical approach.

1) The authors state (Lines 54-55) that “this performance comparison is unfair due…”. Please, give reference where this unfair comparison has been performed.

2) When denote M_1 x M_2, plese use standard notation. All variables that can take numerical value are italic.

3) Please, give reference where turbulence was not taken into account in underwater optical wireless communication channel modeling.

4) Please describe where you take into account OFDM in your analysis.
What kind of mapping you utilize in 16QAM?

5) Do you use coherent demodulation or SIM-based modulation and direct detection?

6) It is necessary to explain more clear how you obtain numerical results in figure 3.

7) How many symbols are utilized in simulations when estimating BER?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The paper can be followed, but there is enough space for improving English.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

the article is interesting, but to increase its quality I recommend the following:

1. Figure 2 is not clear. Please modify this figure.

2. Please provide more details on how you performed the simulations.

3. Although the simulation results are interesting, they are not experimentally validated. As such, I recommend introducing a paragraph with experimental results.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congratulations for the article!