Development of Singular Points in a Beam Passed Phase Screen Simulating Atmospheric Turbulence and Precision of Such a Screen Approximation by Zernike Polynomials

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Numerical simulation method has always been an important means to analyze the turbulence effect of laser atmospheric propagation and the correction performance of adaptive optics system. The most important thing is to correctly simulate the phase screen and accurately reconstruct it. In this paper, it is of great significance to study the development of the beam simulating atmospheric turbulence through the singularity in the phase screen and the approximation accuracy of Zernike polynomial.

Through the numerical experiments, the main research results of this paper are as follows: firstly, it is proved that singular points appear in a wavefront of a Gaussian beam with initial phase profile given by Zernike polynomials or by a screen simulating atmospheric turbulence, and then the dependence between the approximation accuracy and the screen parameters and the number of polynomials entering the approximation basis is determined.

In short, the results of this article are novel and recommended to be published.

Author Response

Dear Sir/Madame!

We are very grateful to you for the work with our article! The questions to the authors were absent so we did not changed the text.

Yours sincerely,

1. Kanev,
2. Makenova,
3. Veretekhin.

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors developed singular points in a beam passed phase screen simulating atmospheric turbulence and precision of such a screen approximation by Zernike polynomials. It seems interesting for the readers care about the light propagation, especially for the issues of turbulence and vortex. Before it is accepted, the following questions should be sufficiently addressed.

1. Explain the origin of the singular points. They are just for simulations or can be produce by experiment?
2. In line 104, authors state “algorithm 2 and 3”. What are they? They should be given in details.
3. Several figures are cut. They should be re-edited.
4. If authors give some comparisons between calculations and experiments, it will be better, particularly giving the accuracy of simulation.
5. Which software platform was used to solve the equations used in the manuscript? It should be cited.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.doc