review_response.tex

\documentclass[12pt,english]{reviewresponse}

%% Language
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage[babel]{microtype}
\usepackage[babel]{csquotes}

%% Fonts
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{lmodern}
%\usepackage{newcent} % different font
%\usepackage[scaled]{beramono} % different monospace font


%% Bibliography
\usepackage[backend=biber,style=ieee,dashed=false,url=false,isbn=false,defernumbers=true,refsection=section]{biblatex}
\bibliography{literature.bib}

\usepackage{hyperref}


\title{My Awesome Paper Title}
\author{Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse}
\journal{IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications}
\manuscript{TWC-2020-X}
\editorname{Dr. Doom}

\begin{document}
\maketitle

% Cover Letter
\input{cover_letter.tex}

% Response to Editor
\editor
\begin{generalcomment}
	The reviewer(s) have suggested some minor revisions to your manuscript. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the reviewer(s)' comments and revise your manuscript.
\end{generalcomment}
\begin{revresponse}[We appreciate your handling of the review process.]
	According to the reviewers' comments, we have checked our manuscript and addressed them in the following way:
	\begin{enumerate}
		\item We added content.
		\item We removed our wrong statements in Section~I.
	\end{enumerate}
\end{revresponse}
\begin{concludingresponse}[to the Editor]
	Thank you for your valuable comments on our manuscript. 
	We have done our best to incorporate changes to reflect the suggestions, which allowed us to improve the quality of our work.
\end{concludingresponse}


% Reviewer 1
\reviewer
\begin{generalcomment}
	General comment about the work.
\end{generalcomment}
\begin{revresponse}[Thank you for your feedback.]
	We have carefully addressed all the issues item by item as follows.
\end{revresponse}

\begin{revcomment}
	Your work is really good. However, you should change the title.
\end{revcomment}
\begin{revresponse}
	We agree that the title is somewhat misleading.
	We therefore changed it in the current version of the manuscript.
\end{revresponse}

\begin{revcomment}
	Everything else is really good.
\end{revcomment}
\begin{revresponse}
	We totally agree. We also added the following to the new version of the manuscript
	\begin{changes}
		This really important sentence was added to the paper.
	\end{changes}
\end{revresponse}

\begin{concludingresponse}[]
	Thank you for your valuable comments on our manuscript. 
\end{concludingresponse}

% Reviewer 2
\reviewer
\label{rev:2}
\begin{generalcomment}
	In general, the work is well-written. However, I have the following concerns.
\end{generalcomment}
\begin{revresponse}[Thank you for your feedback.]
	We have carefully addressed all the issues item by item as follows.
\end{revresponse}

\begin{revcomment}\label{comment:work-not-good}
	The work is not really good.
\end{revcomment}
\begin{revresponse}
	:(
\end{revresponse}

\begin{revcomment}
	You forgot to cite a very important reference (where I am an author)!
\end{revcomment}
\begin{revresponse}
	We are aware that citations on Google Scholar are very important to you.
	Therefore, we added reference \cite{ReviewerReference}.
	
	Also check out our article \cite{Besser2020}.
	
	\printpartbibliography{ReviewerReference,Besser2020}
	
	And btw, your \autoref{comment:work-not-good} was mean! (We can use the \verb|\autoref| command.)
\end{revresponse}


\reviewer
\begin{revcomment}
	Did you know, that the references can be separated for the individual reviewers?
\end{revcomment}
\begin{revresponse}
	Yes. When using \href{https://www.ctan.org/pkg/biblatex}{biblatex}, you can use the \texttt{refsection=section} option to achieve that.
	If we cite a new reference like \cite{Besser2021} here, it will again be number [1].
	
	Note that you might have to run \texttt{pdflatex} and \texttt{biber} multiple times.
	
	And reference [1] for \autoref{rev:2}~\cite{ReviewerReference} is now number [2].
	
	\printpartbibliography{Besser2021,ReviewerReference}
\end{revresponse}
\end{document}