Modeling Funding for Industrial Projects Using Machine Learning: Evidence from Morocco

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1.     Rewrite the title; it doesn't accurately convey the problem being addressed.

2.     Abstract: Kindly address why machine learning is required to solve specific types of problems. This information is missing in the abstract.

3.     Abstract line 16: Among the four machine learning methods, gradient boosting appears to be the most effective overall. Please mention the percentage of improvement achieved in the proposed work.

4.     Please recheck the citations as they do not comply with the MDPI format.

5.     Table 1: Literature review, Some text is missing. Please include the merits and demerits of each work.

6.     Rewrite lines 72 to 78 as they are unclear. Kindly refer to MDPI journals to understand how to write a comprehensive review of existing work. A complete rewrite is required for Section 2.

7.     In Decision Tree, explain in detail which metric is considered for tree selection, such as information gain or Gini index.

8.     Write the mathematical equation for Decision Tree.

9.     In the KNN section, mention the experimental K value and justify its selection.

10.  Justify why the KNN method performs poorly compared to other methods.

11.  How do you adjust weak learner weights in gradient boosting?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. The authors need to explain why they need to apply ML for their research article. Is ML better than other methods? They need to provide some research articles to support their claims.

2. The authors only use supervised learning. Why? Because ML normally includes both supervised and unsupervised learning.

3. Please provide more detailed information about the "Funding method adopted."

4. The policy recommendation is weak. The authors must improve it for the research article to be more beneficial.

No comments

Author Response

the response is attached.

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Review Comments:

1. The abstract section should be enhanced by providing a more concise and explicit explanation of the contributions and consequences.

2.  Inadequate references. Additional recent sources are needed that pertain to the topics of Machine learning modeling, such as

#  A Study on Decision-Making of the Indian Railways Reservation System during COVID-19. Journal of Advanced Transportation.

3. Do you perceive the topic as being novel or significant within the field? Does it specifically target a certain deficiency in the field?

4. To enhance clarity, it is advisable to reiterate the primary objectives of your study in the conclusion.

5. The figure's quality should be improved.

6. Examine the computational efficiency of the model, particularly if the training or estimate time is an important consideration.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Review Report

Funding Industrial Projects Decision Applying Machine Learning: Evidence from Morocco

Comments

In general, the topic of the manuscript offers an interesting examination of world-wide issue of access to financing. Nevertheless, I would strongly advise that the manuscript goes through proofread and proof editing by English-Speaking proofreader. Sentence structure and flow are ambiguous. For example, the first sentence in introduction is really confusing and complicated, quoting …. “

 Based on findings confirmed by the Moroccan macroeconomic context characterized 21 by growing difficulty in access to funding, both for small and medium-sized enterprises 22 and for large ones, in a banking market characterized by under-liquidity and significant 23 funding needs following the launch of structuring national projects “

I have gone through the entire manuscript and really found an urgent need for proofreading.

I have a number of comments and suggestions as follows.

1.    The title can be amended to offer the reader a first glance idea about the content of the manuscript. I would suggest “An Examination of the Determinants of Industrial Projects Funding using Machine Learning: Perspectives from Morocco”

2.    In the introduction, I advise the authors to further clarification to the readers namely, (a) what is the current classification of the industrial projects in Morocco?, (b) what are the formal indicators of having funding problems?, (c) clear objectives of doing research in this topic, and (d) the contribution being offered in this manuscript. That is, what makes this manuscript different from other related research paper?

3.    Table (1) is not really standard. The table must include only three columns. The first column includes the names of the authors and year of publication. The second column includes the variables being examined in the respective paper. The third column includes concise findings of the respective paper.

4.    Since the authors have conducted a semi-structured interviews, there must be a clear determination of the population and sample size. The common and simple equation of sample size is Cochran, (1963). A guide paper is attached. The determination of population and sample help determining the response rate. The authors have received 5198 responses out of what ?

5.    Citations all over the manuscript are not standard, such as (M et M.N 2015).

6.    Beginning at p. 11, the indentations apply to the first line of a paragraph.

The entire manuscript requires thorough proof editing.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Congratulations, now paper is suitable for publication 

Reviewer 2 Report

No comments

No comments

Reviewer 3 Report

Accepted.

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Author

I appreciate your efforts revising the manuscript.

I wish you all the best with further quality research...