修改说明模板-编辑老师：.doc

编辑老师： 非常感谢您来E-mail通知我们稿件（****-****）的审查意见。我们按照您和审稿人的要求，进行了仔细的修改。 按照您给我们的顺序，逐条附上对审稿人意见的答复。 感谢您的辛苦工作！ 对第1位审稿人提出的意见的答复： （1）This paper is too similar to one other previous publication, may the author indicate clearly the unique contribution of their work: Non-equilibrium Molecular Dynamics Simulation on Pure Gas Permeability Through Carbon Membranes，Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, Volume 14, Issue 2, April 2006, Pages 164-170 Response：It should be pointed out that the simulation methods and study emphases of the two papers are quite different, which are given as following: (1) Our simulation strategy is more reasonable, in which the simulation box contains the buffer regions，while Wang and Yu’s simulation box does not. We think that it is necessary to keep the continuity of flux at the entrance and exit of membrane pore for taking account for the effect of the resistance of entrance and exit. (2) We studied the flux and density distribution of various pure gases under various pore widths, and mainly predicted the transport diffusivities and activation energies for various pure gases permeating through nanoporous carbon membranes with various pore widths. In contrast, Wang and Yu studied the permeation mechanism of various pure gases, and investigated the effect of temperature, pore width and membrane thickness on their permeation and ideal separation factors. (2) Pg 2, paragraph 3. Do the experimental results of Chihara[16], Seaton[17] and Chen [18, 19] have any obvious relationship with the main idea of paragraph 3? What the authors wanted to explain by quoting their results? I suggest the authors think it over and make some rearrangements for this part. Response：This paragraph mainly introduces the precious research achievements on the study of gas diffusivity in porous materials. The first two sentences are not very relevant to the main idea of this paragraph. To comply with the comment, we deleted them and the corresponding reference [15]. (3)