Wireless Wave Attenuation in Forests: An Overview of Models

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Simply listing publications may not be the main purpose of the review. The authors of the article became very interested in statistics.

In my opinion, the review lacks an analysis of the results obtained during modeling in relation to their practical use. The authors need to cite the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches to modeling.

The division into three classes of models seems to me controversial. The introduction of innovative models violates the principle of classification according to such criteria! This is similar to the classification: round, square, red. Any of the innovative models described in the publications can be attributed to one of two classes.

Some of the images in the article are also unfortunate. It is unclear what the reader can understand from Figure 2, except that the authors have done a great job of searching for articles on this topic. This image must either be removed or brought to a more understandable appearance. The authors provide many formulas in Table 2 and Table 3 without bothering to describe the parameters used.

The meaning of Fig.6. Did the authors add it for the sake of a beautiful picture?

It is enough to list the possible states of the forest, which are actually many more than shown in Fig.6.

 

Author Response

Thank you to the reviewer. Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Works on the study of propagation patterns are unlikely to ever lose their relevance due to the purely empirical nature of such and the diversity of radio wave propagation conditions. The proposed work certainly has value as an article that systematically presents the state of the arts in the field of radio wave propagation in forest areas. Indeed, forest areas are not the most popular object of research today among specialists in radio systems, since most works are focused on the study of radio wave propagation in places of mass residence of people, where, in fact, the bulk of radio systems are deployed, including promising radio systems. In this regard, the proposed work has unconditional scientific value as a reference guide for quick entry into the field of research by interested specialists.

The authors presented their view on this problem, systematized by eras: from the basic accumulation of knowledge to future promising wireless systems.

There are no comments on the material of the work, everything is quite clear and distinctly presented, and this information can be used in the future by other researchers.

I am not a native English speaker, but I would like to note that the article is easy to read and there are no visible errors.

There are only comments on the layout:

1. There are missing spaces between the reference and the preceding word throughout the text. Example on line 35: " ... diversified[2]", and then throughout the text, including tables.

2. Tables 2 and 3 are broken, need to be re-formatted

3. Figure 1 can be made larger. Especially the captions on the figure

4. A table with a list of abbreviations should be provided at the end of the work. It would be good to indicate the numerical values ​​of the range boundaries LF, MF, HF, VHF, UK(? - this is in table 2, the first line on the right, apparently it should be "H" instead of "K")F, UHF, SHF. These are well-known abbreviations, but for ease of reading the boundaries should be provided

5. In Figure 6, it would be good to add explanations of each subfigure to the captions. This is in the main text, but it is long and inconvenient to search for.

6. A reference to a table is made on line 540. What is the table number? ("The table ??? discuss…")

7. Line 590 refers to Figure 8, which is missing.

8. The last section is apparently mistakenly titled "7. Patents"

 

 

Author Response

Thank you to the reviewer. Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. What are some primary factors contributing to wireless wave attenuation in forests? The author should explain the difference between path loss and shadowing in wireless wave attenuation.
2. How do different types of trees (e.g. deciduous vs coniferous) affect wireless wave attenuation in forests, and how does tree density affect wireless wave attenuation in forests? The author should discuss the concept of multiple scattering and its role in wireless wave attenuation in forests
3. The author should have discussed how the variations in terrain and topography within a forest influence wireless wave attenuation. It should be included in the Section.3
4. The author should explain the different techniques that can be used to mitigate the effects of wireless wave attenuation in forests. Are there any specific models that are commonly used to predict wireless wave attenuation in forests?
5. The author should clarify the concept of foliage transmission loss and its relationship to wireless wave attenuation in forests and explain how different frequencies (e.g., lower vs. higher) impact wireless wave attenuation in forests.
6. The author should tabulate the accuracy of current models for predicting wireless wave attenuation in forests.

Author Response

Thank you to the reviewer. Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks to the authors for the corrections.

Please capitalize the first letter in "4.2.3 hybrid formulas and models".

Please remove the default  Appendix A and Appendix B. 

It would be good to proofread the manuscript thoroughly before final submission.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your thoughtful review and feedback. Please find our detailed responses to all comments in the attached document. We have carefully addressed each suggestion and made the necessary revisions to the manuscript.

Best regards,

[Yuewei Ma, Wenbin Li]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

All the comments were properly addressed. Now its eligible for the publication.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your kind words and for confirming that all comments have been properly addressed. We are truly grateful for your time and valuable feedback throughout the review process. Your guidance has been instrumental in improving the quality of this manuscript, and we are honored to hear that it is now eligible for publication.

We look forward to the final steps in the process and are excited to see the research published. Thank you once again for your support and expertise.

With sincere appreciation,
[Yuewei Ma, Wenbin Li]