Replyto1strefereesreport.docVIP

Reply to 1st referee’s report The force calculated in Figs 2 could be related to some experimental numbers. The reader has no way of knowing the cutting force of 800 nN is large enough to cut anything. That is reader would be interested to know if 800nN is a large number or a small number. Answer: According to our previous studies, the cutting force from an order of nN to depends on the material properties and cutting parameters. For instance, to cut different polymer materials the force needed is about 100-500nN; and to cut metal films the force needed is about 1-2. Therefore, the simulated average value of 800 nN is a reasonable force for cutting softer material. Reply to 2nd referee’s report (i)The context to related work should be explained. One citation of AFM in general (Binnig) is sufficient. Instead, a more detailed discussion of the state of the art of nanomachining with AFM would be appropriate. Instead of just listing a number of papers(‘[7-10]’) please give more details about this work. Answer: According to the suggestion, the References “[7-10] has been changed to Hu et al. [7] conducted a mechanical AFM lithography on ultrathin Ti film. Fang et al. [8] carried out several scribing experiments to study the machining characterizations of the nanolithography process using AFM; the same authors [9] analyzed the effects of the scribing feed on nanolithography using molecular dynamics simulation. Recently, Fang and Chang [10] studied the surface analysis of nanomachining Al material by AFM. (Refer to Page 2 Line 10) (ii)In relation to the present paper, examples for interesting questions are: Has some experimentalist group already measured the displacement of the beam during cutting? Are there some statements about typical errors in such AFM measurements? Answer: We have performed experiments targeted at measuring the displacement of the cantilevers beam. Due to causes including thermal drift accurate measurements of the cantilever b