There is no strategy here that will save you if you wait for those reviewers to materialize their questions. Three of four reviewers signaled follow-ups, yet none have asked anything, and you are staring down a 48-hour clock. That is not a mystery to solve; it is a deadline to manage. The only move that makes sense is to stop waiting for them and start writing the rebuttal as if every one of those questions is already on the table, because in practice, they are.
You have the reviews themselves, which are above average but not glowing. That tells you exactly where the friction points are. Reviewers do not say "I have follow-up questions" when they are satisfied. They say it when they sense something unresolved, a gap in your reasoning, a claim that felt thin, or an experiment that left them wanting more. Your job is not to read their minds. Your job is to reread every line of their critiques, isolate every point that could possibly generate a question, and then answer those points in a structured rebuttal document. If they ask something you did not anticipate, you will have already demonstrated good faith by addressing the likely candidates. If they never ask, you have still submitted a rebuttal that preempts their silence, which is the strongest position you can hold.
The practical step is to draft a short, direct response to each reviewer individually, not a blanket statement. Acknowledge their note about follow-ups, then say something like, "I have considered your comments on X and Y, and here is how I would address them." Attach the specific evidence, the reasoning, and any clarifications that make your position stronger. This is not about guessing correctly; it is about showing that you are not hiding behind the ambiguity of their silence. You are taking control of the narrative, and that confidence reads clearly in a rebuttal.
Do not waste a single hour on anxiety about what they might ask. Spend it on what you already know they care about, because the reviews are a map, and you have been holding it upside down. The clock is tight, but it is not the enemy. The enemy is the assumption that you need their questions to proceed. You do not. You need your own analysis, your own evidence, and a willingness to put it on the page before they even ask. Write the rebuttal as if the questions are already in front of you, because for all practical purposes, they are. Submit it with 24 hours to spare, and let the reviewers see that you were not waiting for permission to engage. That is the move.