Toward Sustainable Gentle Awakenings and Sleep Inertia Mitigation: A Low-Cost IoT-Based Adaptable Lighting and Temperature Control Approach
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1. Some grammatical errors were detected, authors need to re-check the manuscript.
2. Authors need to define the drawbacks of the proposed method in the Introduction Section.
3. In case the phone is off or in airplane mode, how to make sure that the system is still working?
4. For curtain opening, in case of extreme weather conditions, how to ensure that the system is still functioning?
5. The Discussion section should discuss the results obtained, not future works.
6. Has the system been tested in real conditions with people?
7. Some references are out of date, please change with recent journal.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
1. The main challenge that needs to be addressed is the lack of a clear emphasis on sustainability for all parts of the article.
2. The research methodology and why it was chosen are not clearly identified and described.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors
The authors presented a low-cost, technology-assisted digital system for bedroom lighting control. The design of the proposed system is based on smartphone and Internet of Things (IoT) technology. They developed the hardware and software in the proposed system to implement two IoT-based control tasks.
The idea is very good, and very sustainable from the economic perspective, but you have to give more intelligence to this system, especially if you are already using smart devices, you could capture vital data from the users during their sleeping hours, and these combined with the environmental conditions and using artificial intelligence techniques could obtain a more elaborated product that truly helps to overcome the sleep inertia, which not only depends on the amount of light but also some other factors, such as stress level, humidity, temperature, noise, etc. Even implementing what I tell you, it is an economically feasible solution, and with your programming expertise, you could get a complete and very useful product.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Paper work seems interesting,
Abstract is well written sets the context well for reader and catches interest
Work is a mix of IoT and sensors, light based impact on human health.
Accordingly curtains are opened with stepper motor wrt to light.
Line 79, Node MicroController Unit (NodeMCU), why this microcontroller, why not others?
Rational behind this selection is missing?
Line nos 110 to 122, need to rewrite in points of 3 to 5.
Contributions need to be improved
Figure 1, doent show stepper motor setups and uses?
Sunrise simulation alarm app- it can be used as SSAA-
Same can be shown in figure 2
recent references must be used,
references can be included:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8519886
Tiwari, Rajeev, et al. "Automated parking system-cloud and IoT based technique." International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT) 8.4C (2019): 116-123.
- Kumar, Sumit, and Rajeev Tiwari. "An efficient content placement scheme based on normalized node degree in content centric networking." Cluster Computing2 (2021): 1277-1291.
- Tiwari, Rajeev, and Neeraj Kumar. "A novel hybrid approach for web caching." 2012 Sixth International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing. IEEE, 2012.
Flowchart 6, need to be explained?
Results seems promising
Conclusion, looks incomplete, should be re-written, with results incorporated in it.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
This paper proposes an approach that can employ a soft and alerting sunrise simulation and utilize natural light for awakening a sleeper tenderly and gradually to gain full alertness. This paper is interesting and well-organized. I have the following comments before the publication:
I suggest to revise the title to make your contribution clear. The title can be set as your proposed approach for your research area.
There is no significant finding at the end of abstract. Highlight your main finding from your approach.
Revise the format of citation in the text. For example, instead of "study in [1] indicated", write "Alerstedt et al., [1] indicated".
The reference lumps are exited in the paper. For example, in line 64, you cited [1-12]. It should be avoided. Only one or two or maximal three references can be used for an information.
Some relevant references for IoT and Industry 4.0 can be cited as follows:
-Blockchain in supply chain management: a review, bibliometric, and network analysis.
-An integrated approach for a sustainable supplier selection based on Industry 4.0 concept.
After summarizing your contributions, please, list them as your highlights.
Figure 1 has a very low quality. The words are not clear.
A similar comment is for Figure 5.
The pseudo-code for your proposed algorithm should be provided to provide some details for coding. Define the pseudo-code for Figure 8.
The charts in Figure 12 have no sense. They should be removed.
A similar comment for Figure 16 should be applied.
Discussions and conclusions are too short. I suggest to merge them. In your discussion, provide some managerial insights from your results. At the end of conclusion section, provide some recommendations for possible future works based on your contributions and results.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Good job. However, I think the article must maintain strict structural requirements: Introduction, Methods and Methodology, Results and Discussion (these chapters can be presented both as separate and combined), Conclusions.
In the chapter Methods and Methodology, the design of the study should be clearly defined, explaining why the method was chosen, and so on.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors
The papers had not been improved a lot. The changes are minimal.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Now revised as per comments
Author Response
Thank you for your positive and constructive review.
Reviewer 5 Report
The authors have addressed my comments carefully. I accept it for publication.
Author Response
Thank you for your positive and constructive review.
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Some aspects to fix:
1. Abstract must emphasize sustainability.
2. No conclusions section
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your comments.
The revised paper must strictly follow the instruction of the template of Sustainability. Moreover, the revision has taken your and other 4 reviewers' comments into serious consideration throughout the review process.
Comment 1: Abstract must emphasize sustainability.
Lead Author's reply: The last sentence in the Abstract indicates "It (i.e., the proposed system) embodies features of sustainability." The template of Sustainability requires that abstract must be a single paragraph of 200 maximum. The word count of the abstract in the revised paper is exactly 200. No other descriptions can be added into the Abstract.
Comment 2: No conclusions section
Lead Author's Reply: In Round 2, Reviewer 5 suggested that the manuscript should merge Discussion and Conclusion Sections as the Discussion Section since the Discussion and Conclusion Sections were short. In Discussion section, the findings and implications are discussed and the future research directions are indicated. Moreover, the template of Sustainability indicates that the Conclusion section is not mandatory....
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors
Now, It is much better.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
Thank you for your comment.
