24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
查看: 3144  |  回复: 8
【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题,作者binggan13将赠送您 5 个金币

binggan13

铁虫 (初入文坛)

[求助] IEEE ACCESS审稿意见回复求助已有2人参与

Reviewer: 1
Recommendation: Reject (updates required before resubmission)
Comments:
* Language and presentation should be improved.
* What is the motivation for the study? Literature has several anomaly & intrusion detection models.  Why they are not applicable for the current scenario.  As the authors have focused on a specific application, what are the characteristics of the application that demand a new proposal?
* Further figures are very generic.  Like Fig 1, 2, are already available in literature and Fig 3, 4, 5, 6 to the problem is very generic.  Further figure numbering is wrong.  authors should take extra care.
* Literature has the experiements and analysis with the similar techniques and on the same datasets such as:
Intrusion detection model using fusion of chi-square feature selection and multi class SVM, 2017.
Integrated intrusion detection model using chi-square feature selection and ensemble of classifiers, 2019.
These are few examples.  There are several literature dealing with similar techniques
* Authors should make a comparison in terms of proposal, experiments and validate the results.
Additional Questions:
1) Does the paper contribute to the body of knowledge?: to some extent
2) Is the paper technically sound?: to some extent
3) Is the subject matter presented in a comprehensive manner?: to some extent
4) Are the references provided applicable and sufficient?: no
5) Are there references that are not appropriate for the topic being discussed?: No

Reviewer: 2

Recommendation: Reject (updates required before resubmission)

Comments:
Authors presented a better work entitled, Anomaly Detection and Attack Classification for Train Real-time Ethernet. However, authors are recommended to consider the following points,
1. Abstract requires revision in the last section/part to specify clearly how presented research performing significantly over the existing ones.  
3. A few of the figure’s resolutions requires improvement, specially presented in table number 7.
4. Conclusion requires revision, to be more specify about their significant achievements.
5. Provided references are better enough. However, authors are recommended for the following,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jisa.2020.102646.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-019-04319-2
6. A thorough proofread is required.


Additional Questions:
1) Does the paper contribute to the body of knowledge?: Yes,
2) Is the paper technically sound?: Yes,
3) Is the subject matter presented in a comprehensive manner?: Yes,
4) Are the references provided applicable and sufficient?: Yes, provided references are better enough. However, authors need to read the following as well.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jisa.2020.102646.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-019-04319-2

5) Are there references that are not appropriate for the topic being discussed?: No
Reviewer: 3
Recommendation: Reject (updates required before resubmission)
Comments:
They need to explain why they are using old datasets.
The figures starting from figure-9 are not clear at all. Was it necessary to add so many images?
小白第一次投稿,求助各位大佬看看有戏吗,以及哪些是棘手问题,需要慎重考虑回复的。
回复此楼
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

dyp8848

金虫 (正式写手)

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
你提出的异常入侵检测算法为什么比现有的更好,既然是针对列车以太网的,为什么没有说明列车以太网的特殊性,提出的算法的实验数据较现有的算法没有显著提高。
简要来说就是缺乏创新性
2楼2020-12-24 21:10:33
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
3楼2020-12-24 21:42:42
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

binggan13

铁虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by dyp8848 at 2020-12-24 21:10:33
你提出的异常入侵检测算法为什么比现有的更好,既然是针对列车以太网的,为什么没有说明列车以太网的特殊性,提出的算法的实验数据较现有的算法没有显著提高。
简要来说就是缺乏创新性

好的 谢谢!

发自小木虫IOS客户端
4楼2020-12-30 09:04:07
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

binggan13

铁虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by dyp8848 at 2020-12-24 21:10:33
你提出的异常入侵检测算法为什么比现有的更好,既然是针对列车以太网的,为什么没有说明列车以太网的特殊性,提出的算法的实验数据较现有的算法没有显著提高。
简要来说就是缺乏创新性

好的 谢谢!

发自小木虫IOS客户端
5楼2020-12-30 09:04:14
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

binggan13

铁虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by dyp8848 at 2020-12-24 21:10:33
你提出的异常入侵检测算法为什么比现有的更好,既然是针对列车以太网的,为什么没有说明列车以太网的特殊性,提出的算法的实验数据较现有的算法没有显著提高。
简要来说就是缺乏创新性

好的 谢谢!

发自小木虫IOS客户端
6楼2020-12-30 09:04:25
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

azxa0996

禁虫 (小有名气)

本帖内容被屏蔽

7楼2021-01-05 10:54:27
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

荆chu

木虫 (正式写手)

楼主,请问:IEEE Access回复,每个“Author action: We updated the manuscript by ….”都要写吗?有的问题觉得回复了就可以了。
8楼2021-07-26 10:49:10
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

英论阁cn

银虫 (正式写手)

【答案】应助回帖

虽然三位审稿人都是拒绝,但也都留下修改重送的机会,也给出改进的方向,逐条对论文修正会大大提升改投的成功率。第一位审稿人主要是要求作者说明此研究和先前研究不同之处,特别是方法论上。第一和第二位也提到dataset的问题,确认一下引用的是否是最新的数据,如果必需引用较早的数据,请说明理由。
值得注意的是两名审稿人提到语言和图例编辑上的问题,这是中国作者投稿国际期刊常见的审稿人回复,通常期刊会建议作者寻求英语母语学科专家的协助。并请他们附上编修证明书声明语言问题已经得到改善。国内有许多聘有英美学科母语专家的润色公司可以帮您解决这个问题。还有熟悉投稿规定,经验丰富的投稿专家帮您调整图表格式、解析度,省去自己阅读投稿规定以及排版、检查的时间,帮助您专注于内容质量的提升上。
9楼2021-07-26 15:45:43
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 binggan13 的主题更新
不应助 确定回帖应助 (注意:应助才可能被奖励,但不允许灌水,必须填写15个字符以上)
信息提示
请填处理意见