Research on a Multimode Adaptive Cruise Control Strategy with Emergency Lane-Changing Function
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The idea of the manuscript is so impressive, however there are some points that should be answered and revised which are listed below:
1. The framework flowchart in Figure 1 has no beginning or end
2. The quality of figure 5 is very low
3. The quality of the graphs in figures 6 and on is very low and should be improved
4. The contents and topics presented in the article are very confused and complicated. What exactly is the main focus of the article to improve? Contributions should be clearly explained at the end of the introduction section.
5. The achievements of the proposed method and test results should be quantitatively presented in the abstract
6. Some typos should be double check.
7. The author should explain more why solution quality of their proposed approach is much better than the others?
8. The authors need to present the complexity of their proposed method (time and space) and compare it with some other state-of-the-art or successful classic methods.
9. The authors don't discuss the limitations of the study correctly.
10. The author should explain more why solution quality of their proposed approach is much better than the others?
11. The authors don't discuss the limitations of the study correctly.
12. The author needs to compare the performance of his/her method with the most recent methods published in the literature.
13. Try to include the sensitivity analysis of the system to justify the performance of your conclusion and proposals.
14. References for 2022 and 2023 do not exist or are few. The article to be published in 2023 should mainly include articles from the last 3 years. Update references
English should be edited by a native
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Here are the comments from the reviewer.
In paragraph one of the Introduction section, avoidance distance by using either steering or braking is discussed. The avoidance distance depends also on the friction coefficient between the tire and road surfaces. The author may discuss this point.
Figure 5 is not clear, and the labels can’t be read. Please improve the quality of the figure.
With the aid of the schematic diagram, please show how the equations provided in Equation (21) are obtained. If these equations are available in the previous publication, please cite the related paper.
In Equation (21), why the contribution of the lateral tire forces in the longitudinal direction is not taken into account in the third equation whereas the contribution of the lateral tire forces in the longitudinal direction is taken into account in the second equation?
Are the fourth and fifth equations in Equation (21) correct?
What is the reason for using different symbols for the tire cornering stiffnesses in Equations (21) and (27)?
The minimization of the objective function in Equation (32) requires the estimation of the friction coefficient. How is the friction coefficient estimated?
Please use clear versions of Figures 6 to 20.
A displacement error plot for the trajectories shown in Figure 12 can be included.
Table 2 should appear on a single page. In the current version of the manuscript, parts of the table appear on two pages. Also, please use the units m for h and r. For consistency, please use either m/s or km/h for v.
For the emergency lane change scenario, please include and discuss the plot of the ratio of the vector sum of longitudinal and lateral tire forces to the product of friction coefficient and vertical tire load.
In Figure 18, why there is a sudden peak at time t = 160 s?
There are inconsistencies in the reference format. Please refer to the journal referencing style and make appropriate changes.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The previous comments from the reviewer have been addressed adequately.
