The concept of state of the art references in review of a paper My question is that what improvement in introduction of a paper or other parts of paper the authors should do when the reviewers wrote the following sentence:

The authors have missed many important state of the art references

Thanks in advance
I think the statement is very clear. Wether your literature research was incomplete or the reviewer just wants two of his own papers cited once more, we cannot tell.

Make sure you can exclude the first possibility, then try guessing, and either be bold in your rebuttal letter, or cite some more.

(If the reviewer gave no hint to specific references, I'd suspect that you might have a somewhat grave problem: Either you paper is indeed crappy, or that reviewer just doesn't want it published, or wants it delayed, for his own good.)