Asset Management, Reliability and Prognostics Modeling Techniques
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The researcher focus towards model building and testing was clearly defined with required variables into it. The researcher had provided enough inputs from various resources as literature review and cited accordingly. Overall research study been carried out with proven justification and there by it provides more insights to the readers point of view.
Author Response
Thank you for your time and for the review!
Reviewer 3 Report
1. It is review or research manuscript.
2. Study objectives have to be mentioned in the Abstract
3. Study objectives have to be appeared in the 1st paragraph of the Introduction.
4. Paraphrase some sentences in the manuscript.
5. Citations are required for Figures also.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Thank you for submitting you research paper for Sustainability.
1. The abstract does not flow very well. As is, it looks primarily like a result-reporting exercise rather than conveying the central idea(s) canvassed in the paper and the contribution it makes to the existing body of scientific knowledge.
2. The introduction must include the importance of this work can be highlighted at the end of the introduction. Also, the novelty of this paper should be further justified by highlighting main contributions to the existing literature.
3. It would be useful to provide a paragraph at the end of the introduction section to outline the structure of the paper.
4. What are the research implications?
5. limitations and future work are missed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors made an effort to adopt the suggestions and ideas I had with the aim of improving the quality of the manuscript. They also accepted the fact that the application is presented in more detail, as well as citing papers on similar topics. In this form the paper is acceptable for publication.
Reviewer 4 Report
Thank you for resubmitting the revised version of your paper. The paper has improved significantly after addressing the reviewers’ comments. I am satisfied with the current version.
