A Fast Factorized Back-Projection Algorithm Based on Range Block Division for Stripmap SAR

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

All mathematical formulae must be made self-consistent, in the sense that they must be easily understood. This is not the case at present. Both the dimensionality of the data and the domain of existence cannot be understood. I recommend inserting a section notation so you can better explain the paremetry graphics. The symbol you indicate as 'coherent summation' you have to explain it better (mathematics is beautiful because it is inopinable and unquestionable). The SAR geometry in Fig. 1 needs to be made clearer.
Fig. 2 (a) too small, you understand little.

The punctuation between the formulae and the text is non-existent.

Fig. 5 explain better and comment in depth in the text of the article.
The experimental results are fine.

NN

Author Response

I have completed the reply to the reviewers' comments, and the details are attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper “A Fast Factorized Back-projection Algorithm Based on Range Block Division for Stripmap SAR” presents a very intensive technical-scientific contribution for the SAR community. 

The manuscript is worth for publication for three specific reasons:

1. The proposed algorithm is very well supported by mathematics as well as by previous methods that are appropriately aligned to support the new material. 

2. The partitioning of the paper is well structured and consequently it is easy for the reader to follow. 

3. The experimental results are adequate for supporting the method. 

Minor revisions

a. At the end of the Introduction a short description is needed regarding the structure of the paper.

b. The conclusions are very poor. 

Author Response

I have completed the reply to the reviewers' comments, and the details are attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In this manuscript, to improve the computing efficiency for strip-map SAR imaging, the author proposes a fast factorized back-projection algorithm based on range block division. However, there are some suggestions in the following.

1. The authors analyzed the processing efficiency of different imaging methods. However, there are no obvious conclusions. The author should clarify the purpose of analyzing processing efficiency.

2. In section 2.4, the author should describe clearly the division principle in range direction. Also, the author should define the restrictive conditions of range division.

3. “The distance from the above-mentioned pixel positions to the imaging scene center O is given by: ”, what is the above-mentioned pixel positions? Meanwhile, in formula (31), what does “G” stand for?

4. In section 2.4, the new scene center and the new antenna position are confused.

5. The author should add the whole imaging flow chart.

6. In Figure 10 and Figure 11, the imaging results are obvious different, please explain it.

Author Response

I have completed the reply to the reviewers' comments, and the details are attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The author had solved my question.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

    Thank you for your recognition of our work.

Sincerely,

Yawei Wu