24小时热门版块排行榜

>论坛更新日志 (4472)
>虫友互识 (284)
>论文投稿 (239)
>文献求助 (228)
>学术会议 (187)
>导师招生 (169)
>博后之家 (139)
>休闲灌水 (120)
>考博 (61)
>硕博家园 (56)
>教师之家 (46)
>攻关文献(高奖励) (43)
>考研 (41)
>基金申请 (36)
>找工作 (27)
>功能材料 (25)

返回列表

当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖

Uchihaa

新虫 (小有名气)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 299.7
帖子: 160
在线: 36.4小时
虫号: 10346892

[交流] 论文 reject and resubmit （附上审稿意见）

•    Associate Editor Comments, if any, are listed below:

如题，求大神分析一下这种情况下重投中稿的几率有多大；为何不是个大修？

Associate Editor:
Comments to Author:
(There are no comments. Please check to see if comments were included as a file attachment with this e-mail or as an attachment in your Author Center.)

•    Reviewer Comments, if any, are listed below:

Reviewer: 1

Comments to the Author
This paper formulates the computation resource allocation problem of public blockchain network from the viewpoint of coalition game theory under the mobile edge computing environment. A coalition formation game-based algorithm to maximize the system sum utility has been also proposed. Finally, the authors have performed simulation and comparison with only two schemes, i.e., noncooperative and random formation. The paper is well structured and the problem definition is quite satisfactory. More significantly, this paper addresses state-of-the-art topics like the blockchain, 5G networks, WBN, or edge computing. The proposed scheme is fairly related to the IoT field but the relation is not that much close as the only relation is the IDMs. The level of English writing is also satisfactory although some difficult words have been employed. In general, the paper will be of interest for this journal; nevertheless, the author should revise their paper by evaluating the following comments.
1-    As said, the problem definition has been explained in a good fashion in the introduction and its specific section; however, I suggest adding a graphical representation to the introduction to better illustrate the occasion for a high level stand point.
2-    The computation-consuming problem of the PoW consensus algorithm and the resource-limitation of IDMs should be clarified. In other words, the authors should exactly mention the hardware power of mobile device and the complexity of the aforementioned algorithm to justify this challenge. As you know, nowadays, the mobile devices take the advantage of 64-bit Octa-core or Deca-core ARM processors, so they are not limited as microcontrollers. The resource-limitation mostly used for the IoT nodes that uses ARM microcontrollers or other kinds of microcontrollers.
3-    A table of notation or nomenclature will be so useful to follow the paper. For example, what ESP or RSU stands for? ESP is defined in the figure 1. More importantly, for the scheme itself.
4-    I think more details can be added to Fig. 1. To better depict the system model. Further, I suggest using same notation throughout the paper. For example, in Fig. 1. IDM is more preferable than the sole mobile device.
5-    One of the main concerns is that the authors have just compared their work with two of the related ones.
6-    The second main concern is that they have not mentioned that on which hardware platform they performed the simulation.

Reviewer: 2

Comments to the Author
Give a better picture of what you have done with diagrams. Further, explain the real algorithms you tested against what.

回复此楼