投了Applied Optics，审稿意见回来了，被拒。意见：
Reviewer 1
The article is focused on XXX. The authors systematically investigated both the XX and the XX theoretically and experimentally. The paper is interesting and worthy of publication although some minor changes are needed：
1.XXX.
2.XXX.
Reviewer 2
The authors analyzed XXX. The writing is good and comprehensive and the conclusion is relatively right. But analyzing XXX is a basic procedure in the research. I think the novelty of this paper is lower than the criteria of this journal.
回复此楼
+2/224
