Optical Properties Analysis of Scattering Media Based on GI-OCT Imaging
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this manuscript, the authors further upgraded and studied the ghost imaging OCT system published before. The imaging reconstruction was conducted in various scattering medium of diluted processed milk. By comparing the PSNR and structural similarity index of the reconstruction condition, the authors found out the target image can be reconstructed clearly when SSIM value >0.7. In this study, the relationship between the contrast and the scattering of imaging reconstruction is clear and could be utilized to measure the optical properties of the solution. Overall, it is one of the series studies on GI-OCT and provide some benchmarks for measuring optical properties for future applications. I have the following suggestions and comments that hope the authors can address.
1. For Figure 5, please add the corresponding PSNR and SSIM along with the images in the figure. It will help the readers understand the difference between PSNR and SSIM better and easily link them to the images.
2. In this study, the authors used "E" pattern to test the image reconstruction. I am wondering if other image pattern is possible or will the original image size or pattern impact the image reconstruction conditions. For example, if we changed to pattern "F" will the criteria still be SSIM>0.7?
3. In the conclusion part, the authors talked about the next step study. I think it is a good idea to move it to discussion and expand the discussion there to help the readers to understand the potential direction for next step.
4. In the discussion part, I recommend the authors explains some of the potential challenges for applying GI-OCT in the applications of OCT. Or what tasks still need to be done to achieve replacing current OCT technologies.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments are attached to the review.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Thanks for the change in the manuscript. And yet, if possible, then redraw figure 1, taking into account modern standards for drawings in scientific articles.
