Optimizing Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure on Highways: A Multi-Agent-Based Planning Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper discusses the optimization of highway traffic focusing on EV charging. The paper is well structured. The methods adopted are adequately described in a clear way. Only minor comments can be addressed to improve the quality.

- The tables are insert as image. A better quality can be achieved as text.

- The figures are sometimes a little noisy. Plese consider to use higher resolution versions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper proposes a multi-agent simulation-based approach for the planning of EV charging facilities on a highway and enables the simulation and analysis of EV users' travel activities and charging behaviors on the highway. Here are my suggestions for the manuscript:

1- Page 4, Line 143: It is given that “…the charging model for charging plugs is defined as follows: 1.75 C between 0% and 50% SoC, 0.125 C between 50% and 75% SoC, and 0.5 C between 75% and full charge [30].” I have doubts about the reliability of this data source and check 0.125 C between 50% and 75% SoC due to its being too low. Please also support this charging model with academic references.

2- Apart from the lack of systematic planning for EV charging facilities on highways in China, the paper also needs to describe and compare the currently applied plans for EV charging facilities on highways globally to underline the main contributions of the given methodology.

3- Fig. 3,4,5,6, and 7 chart styles can be improved for better virtualization.

4- In contrast to existing charging networks, considering the rapidly increasing number of electric vehicles, it is necessary to add an assessment of how valid the proposed planning and social cost/benefit could be 10 or 20 years in the future, with this study.

 

5- The simulation model section can be arranged more clearly based on assumptions such as the number of vehicles etc. and other simulation details.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The study presents a multi-agent approach to improve EV charging facilities. The authors presented a clear method using an open source software. The results are promising. The (B-HK-M) highway is well selected.

Some comments to be considered are shown below:

1- The manuscript is well written except for line 206-207 in page 6. ‘’ …. charging stations on the highway suggests that the lack of a reliable planning approach for the charging facilities’’. The sentence is grammatically incorrect. Rather, you could say ‘’ …. charging stations on the highway suggests that there is a lack of a reliable planning approach for the charging facilities’’.

2- Please the quality and presentation of Figure 3. The appearance, the tick marks of the secondary axis etc.

No significant issues detected. In fact, the manuscript is well written except for one sentence in line 206-207 as mentioned in the above comments for authors.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

In this study, analyzes were carried out to locate the EV charging stations appropriately. The subject of study is current and interesting. Especially in recent years, with the increase in the use of EV, the appropriate determination of charging stations has become an important research area. However, the study needs major revision, especially the experimental part. Here are my suggestions:

1) Literature study is improved. More studies published in recent years should be presented critically.

2) All tables in Manuscript do not fit the template and are presented as screenshots. Tables must be created in a table structure.

3) The purpose of OpenStreetMap data is not well understood. In addition, the methods by which the analyzes were carried out were specified. Many analyzes can be performed thanks to Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Have relevant GIS analyzes been used? If used, more details should be given. I recommend using GIS for this. In addition, the theoretical background of the study is weak. Improvements should be made in this regard.

4) The novelty of the method used and the study in general is not sufficiently understood. Introduction and discussion sections should be rearranged by stating the originality of the study.

5) In conclusion, suggestions for future studies should be presented.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have successfully addressed the corrections and additions I mentioned.  It is clear that there is a noticeable improvement in this version. One more suggestion is given below;

- Please reflect the explanations of your Response 4 to Section 5 based on future charging demand issues.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Thank you for the revisions. There is no explanation about the use of GIS. I'd like to at least see a discussion about it. Other than that, the work appears to be ready for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf