我正在修改的一篇二审的文章：其中1个审稿人的意见是：
Comment 1：I invested quite a lot of concentration to understand the difference between assessment performance in Figs.1 a) and b) (the same for Fig 4 & 7), but I cannot do any conclusions. Could this be explained more precise? How did you compute the values in table a) for each figure?
我用近2页纸来回答此问题，各分为N点，详细的描述每张图的计算过程及其可得出的结论。
二审此审稿人给的意见是：
Dear Authors.
Thank You for thorough explanations of my open questions/comments – especially to the comment 1.
I wish You further research success of the topic.
Sincerely.
返回小木虫查看更多
京公网安备 11010802022153号
解释，强烈解释你的图啊。虽然小方向不同，大方向肯定是相同的。并且，审稿人可能只是一个老板下面的小硕，就像和你打游戏的可能是小学生而已。放宽心
我正在修改的一篇二审的文章：其中1个审稿人的意见是：
Comment 1：I invested quite a lot of concentration to understand the difference between assessment performance in Figs.1 a) and b) (the same for Fig 4 & 7), but I cannot do any conclusions. Could this be explained more precise? How did you compute the values in table a) for each figure?
我用近2页纸来回答此问题，各分为N点，详细的描述每张图的计算过程及其可得出的结论。
二审此审稿人给的意见是：
Dear Authors.
Thank You for thorough explanations of my open questions/comments – especially to the comment 1.
I wish You further research success of the topic.
Sincerely.
二审又增加一个审稿人，正在小修，希望对你有帮助，也祝你好运，
将图改得更易懂，并且对图的解释要非常清晰。
这个确实只能按要求改，杂志出版的要求就是要有尽量多的受众，有的审稿人就是和你专业不同，只能给他们科普。不过这种意见反而是最好改的，你说什么都是对的，只要让他明白就可以了