Response to Comments by Dewey H. Hodges

Response to comments by reviewers

Response to Comments by Referee #1

[email protected] & [email protected] We would like to thank the reviewer for careful reading of the manuscript and the constructive comments and questions which have helped us to improve the manuscript. The reviewer comments are given below together with our responses and changes made to the manuscript. General Comments 5 This manuscript describes nighttime observations of OH and HO...

Response to Reviewers ’ Comments

Response to Reviewer’s Comments

#2. It is unclear why the authors only consider dust: the same problem should exist for other sources of iron as well, or probably even worse, especially finer particles from combustion? Why not consider those? You could presumably do this rather easily, just assuming BC has Fe, and including the size distribution of BC? There are recent reviews of the size of combustion iron particles (e.g. Wa...

Response to Reviewer Comments

Given d > 2 and a set of n grid points Q in R, we design a randomized algorithm that finds a w-wide separator, which is determined by a hyper-plane, in O(n 2 d log n) sublinear time such that Q has at most ( d d+1 + o(1))n points one either side of the hyper-plane, and at most cdwn d−1 d points within w 2 distance to the hyper-plane, where cd is a constant for fixed d. In particular, c3 = 1.209...