Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have submitted a "review article". The subject topic they have covered is extensive and should be published. The citations are comprehensive. The only one correction that I suggest: Line 66: 1910s should be 1980s.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please check the attached comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Suggest to make a improvement.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 The topic of this review is an overview of orbit determination methods for space-based optical detection platforms, however, the content shows that the topic of this review is an overview of orbit determination methods for space objects based on space-based optical detection platforms. Only fundamental concepts were given in this review, comprehensive methods and comparative analysis haven’t been addressed in this review. The contribution of this review should be addressed properly.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1.  There are no numerical results given in this paper.

2.  There are no equations for orbit determination algorithms given in this paper.

3.  The authors do not mention the crucial issue of computer architecture for this problem.   For example, GPUs or other modern massively parallel computers would speedup the computations by many orders of magnitude.

4.  The authors must be aware that similar problems have already been solved many decades ago by the militaries in many countries, including Russia, USA, UK, France, Australia, Japan, Germany and China.  Why don't the authors discuss the methods used in China today to solve such problems?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript has been revised according to the review comments. It could be accepted after moderate English language editing is conducted.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you for your comments and suggestions on our submission.

 

In the latest revised manuscript, we have thoroughly reviewed the entire manuscript and improved the quality of English language in accordance with your comment. All changes made in response to your comment are highlighted in blue color.

 

We appreciate the opportunity to improve the quality of our paper with your suggestion and would like to extend our sincere gratitude to you again.

 

Best regards,

Zhang Zhe

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have not adequately addressed the comments in my first review of this paper.  In particular, there are still no numerical results; this is a major lacuna in a paper for an archival technical journal on this topic.  Second, the authors have not added any equations for non-trivial algorithms for orbit determination.  But rather, the equations that the authors added are trivial and useless; especially equations (5) and (6).  The authors did not take any of the comments in my first review or this paper seriously.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have not satisfactorily addressed my two prior reviews.  In particular, there are no quantitative results in this paper.  There is no meaningful discussion of real time computational complexity with GPUs in the year 2024.  There are no useful state-of-the-art algorithms or tradeoffs between algorithms or discussion of future research.  There is no quantification of the accuracy or speed or capacity or reliability of existing state-of-the-art algorithms that have already been developed and tested and deployed by the militaries of China, Russia, USA, UK, France, Germany, Israel and other nations.  But rather, the authors have merely added useless tables with sketches of textbook physics equations in an attempt to make it look like they have actually added useful state-of-the-art algorithms.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf