Reviewer #1 (Remarks to the Author):

I think the authors did a very thorough job answering the questions and
comments from all three referees.
My only (tiny) remaining comment is that I would put the clear statement
of the probe power P=0.003 P_sat in the main text instead of the SI.
This may be perfectly clear to the authors when they write "weak probe",
but for a more general audience this clarification would be nice.

But independent of what the authors choose on this, I recommend
publication of this paper in Nat. Comm.


Reviewer #2 (Remarks to the Author):

My questions and comments from the first review have been fully
addressed in the new version. Now I am happy to recommend the manuscript
for publication in Nature Communications.


Reviewer #3 (Remarks to the Author):

The authors have clarified the points raised in my first review, and I
recommend publication.