Articles | Volume 2, issue 1
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed underthe Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
When the MOUSE leaves the house
- Final revised paper (published on 16 Apr 2021)
- Preprint (discussion started on 21 Jan 2021)
Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor |
: Report abuse
RC1: 'Comment on mr-2021-8', Anonymous Referee #1, 13 Feb 2021
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Bernhard Bluemich, 14 Feb 2021
- RC2: 'Comment on mr-2021-8', Anonymous Referee #2, 14 Feb 2021
Peer review completion
AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
AR by Bernhard Bluemich on behalf of the Authors (20 Feb 2021)  Author's response Author's tracked changes
ED: Publish subject to corrections (10 Mar 2021) by Fabien Ferrage
AR by Bernhard Bluemich on behalf of the Authors (11 Mar 2021)  Author's response Manuscript
I hereby congratulate the authors on a very informative article. The topic of the mouse revisited is timely, I agree that it can benefit tremendously from new developments, but that the concept must move closer to the application, and should become easier to use by non-NMR/MRI experts. The article is written in a very readable and entertaining manner, and yet is of high technical quality too, so that I believe that it will remain of interest for considerable time to come. It is nice to see an article that is prospective, spilling the beans before the harvest. I believe that the field would benefit from more adventures like these, since they help to shape our field. In this sense, I congratulate the authors for doing a great job of the review (some historical events there), and of planning the future life of this breakthrough device, laying open the design choices, and the reasons for them, and for not just presenting us with a final package. This is both didactive, as will it encourage others to pick up on the open possiblities. Well don. Finally, the paper is also excellently written. Hence I suggest to publish as is.