Reply to Comment on "Fluctuation-dissipation relations in the non-equilibrium critical dynamics of Ising models"

We have recently shown that in non-equilibrium spin systems at criticality the limit $\Xin$ of the fluctuation-dissipation ratio X(t,tw) for t >> tw >> 1 can be measured using observables such as magnetization or energy [Phys. Rev.\ E {\bf 68}, 016116 (2003)]. Pleimling argues in a Comment [cond-mat/0309652] on our paper that for such observables correlation and response functions are dominated by one-time quantities dependent only on t, and are therefore not suitable for a determination of $\Xin$. Using standard scaling forms of correlation and response functions, as used by Pleimling, we show that our data do have a genuine two-time dependence and allow X(t,tw) and $\Xin$ to be measured, so that Pleimling's criticisms are easily refuted. We also compare with predictions from renormalization-group calculations, which are consistent with our numerical observation of a fluctuation-dissipation plot for the magnetization that is very close to a straight line. A key point remains that coherent observables make measurements of $\Xin$ easier than the traditionally used incoherent ones, producing fluctuation-dissipation plots whose slope is close to $\Xin$ over a much larger range.