这种情况怎么回复？ - 论文投稿 - 交流 - 小木虫论坛-学术科研互动平台

版块导航: 正在加载中...

客户端APP下载

论文辅导

申博辅导

登录注册

应《网络安全法》要求，自2017年10月1日起，未进行实名认证将不得使用互联网跟帖服务。为保障您的帐号能够正常使用，请尽快对帐号进行手机号验证，感谢您的理解与支持！

24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

法国红酒。

新虫 (小有名气)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 162.3
帖子: 210
在线: 24.4小时
虫号: 14468479

已领完

这种情况怎么回复？: 领取红包 (小木虫手机app专属红包)

扫一扫，下载小木虫客户端

Reviewer: 1

Recommendation: Reject (do not encourage resubmit)

Comments:
The authors proposed an optimal energy trading policy in the presence of grid, renewable and storage energy. After presenting the theoretical model and solution approach, the authors presented simulation results to show the effectiveness of the proposed scheme. However, there exists a few fundamental issues as follows:

1. The topic is well studied -- energy trading in the presence of grid, renewable, and storage energy. Even the uncertainty in energy trading in the presence of renewable energy sources is studied in the literature. Therefore, the motivation behind revisiting an old problem is not clear. The authors should focus on this issue. Some of the works in this domain are as follows:

a) "Optimized Day-Ahead Pricing for Smart Grids with Device-Specific Scheduling Flexibility", IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communication, 2012.

b) "Heterogeneous Delay Tolerant Task Scheduling and Energy Management in the Smart Grid with Renewable Energy", IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communication, 2013.

c) "ENTRUST: Energy Trading Under Uncertainty in Smart Grid Systems", Computer Networks (Elsevier), 2016.

d) "D2S: Dynamic Demand Scheduling in Smart Grid Using Optimal Portfolio Selection Strategy", IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 2015.

additionally, there exists several works similar to the proposed scheme.

2. The proposed scheme is not compared with the state-of-the-art schemes rather it is compared with the naive approaches. Therefore, the efficacy of the proposed scheme is questionable. The authors are suggested to consider some of the existing works and compare them with the proposed scheme.

发自小木虫Android客户端

回复此楼