Dear Dr. D.Alessandro,

Thank you for submitting a revised manuscript. I'd like to request that your response to reviewer files includes on all major items (i.e. not mere typos) the verbatim adjustment to the manuscript. I find this facilitates the review process, reducing reviewer effort, thereby speeding up the time to publication.

Thank you for addressing this. I'll try to process the manuscript quickly once this is done.

Regards,

TIm Garrett

The reviewers have identified two primary concerns: the justification for the statistical methods and the clarity of their description. The authors have responded to those concerns but a second review is warranted.

Unfortunately, I was unable to secure a second round of reviews. However, the first round of reviews was especially thorough and constructive. Having carefully examined the revised manuscript and the detailed response to reviewers, I am satisfied that the authors have addressed the substantive concerns raised in the initial review round, particularly with respect to clarifying the methodology and its relation to existing clustering metrics.

The central result of the article is that cloud droplets in the bottleneck size range (~25–50 µm) are preferentially isolated, especially under subsaturated conditions. This finding provides observational evidence that entrainment-mixing can broaden the droplet size distribution, physics that is relevant to precipitation initiation. What stands out in my eye is that the result was obtained using a fairly novel particle-by-particle clustering framework applied to 3D holographic (HOLODEC) measurements.

In my assessment, the combination of innovative measurements and physical insight on a topic of high current interest justifies publication in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.