Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is written very well and according to the journal's scope. It is publishable after addressing some issues. 

1. The first sentence of introduction should have to update with latest studies as “In recent years, the process of industrialization and urbanization has been accelerating, but the problem of air pollution and climate change is becoming more and more prominent, seriously affecting people’s daily life and physical health [1,2]”

[1] Application of an artificial neural network to optimise energy inputs: An energy-and cost-saving strategy for commercial poultry farms

[2] Extreme weather events risk to crop-production and the adaptation of  innovative management strategies to mitigate the risk: A retrospective survey of rural Punjab, Pakistan. Technovation. Volume 117, 102255

2. In the first paragraph of introduction, you must have to update the given sentence with given studies as “Air pollution control requires the collection of information on polluting gases [1-3]” 

[3] Sensitivity analysis of greenhouse gas emissions at farm level: case study of grain and cash crops.

[4] Analysis of Energy Input–Output of Farms and Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Case Study of Cotton Growers

[5] Understanding farmers’ intention and willingness to install renewable energy technology: A solution to reduce the environmental emissions of agriculture

*** You must have to update the given sentence with given studies [3-5]

3. Please add structure of the article at the end of introduction. 

4. Please separately write section of results and discussion. 

5. Please provide justification of findings with previous studies. 

6. Please add the study limitations at the end of conclusion. a

7.  Please add the recommendations for future studies at the end of conclusion.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for improvement are as follows:

Line1- Rewrite first sentence in a scientific way.

Line113- A (space of interest) is decomposed using the hexagonal prism unit--- give reference

Line147- Genetic Algorithm is a commonly used --- give reference

Line193- formula 2

Line194- where:

Line222- write formula before numbers

Figure 10: Results need to be clearly present with the location data. When you talk about horizontal distribution- at what height this horizontal plane is? Regarding vertical distribution- GPS location is needed---- otherwise, the result is not a valid.

Apart from this--- there is a need to discuss limitations of the work (atmospheric conditions and etc...)

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors presented a very interesting paper on UAV used for environmental detection. The authors proposed a path planning method in three-dimensional space suitable for UAV detection of atmospheric environment, which can generate a full coverage path with optimal coverage density under energy constraints. The article is much needed from the point of view of UAV applications.

Unmanned aviation is developing at an astonishing pace. Thanks to their growing popularity, UAVs are being used in various areas of life. They support entrepreneurs, environmentalists, emergency services, various institutions and other activities around the world.

The article is very correctly edited and has great scientific value.

The authors should only make a minor correction

1 Introduction

The chapter is edited correctly

2 Materials and Methods

The expression in lines >> 125- 126<< should, in my opinion, be described by the formula

2.2 Optimal Coverage Sampling Density

Why, after decomposing the basic unit, do the authors divide the study space evenly into subregions of 128 of the same size? It would be good to explain this 

2.3 Coverage Path Planning

Lines >>154-155 <<"In this study, we decompose the entire study area from both horizontal and vertical 154 perspectives, resulting in more path points than the traditional CPP algorithm." How does such a procedure relate to previous research?

2.3.3 Design of Fitness Function

Formula (2). Please check all indexes

Figure 2 is perhaps redundant. I leave to the decision of the authors 

Figure 4: Path planning results. (a) Result of GA (b) Result of DF-GA. Perhaps it was good to detail the differences between the paths planned by the traditional genetic algorithm and the genetic algorithm with dynamic function, respectively. This would have increased the readability of the figure

Figure 7: AirSim simulation system. Perhaps the simulation system should have been presented in a more elaborate way?

Figure8 should be enlarged -or divided into two parts. It is very important and, above all, interesting for readers.

The conclusion must answer the purpose. Some recommendations for future work should be given in the Conclusion Perhaps the authors plan to build an integrated decision system for their Research in the future. Please see the solution for example in the paper:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11081-021-09668-2

Simulation results show that the proposed method can effectively improve the coverage density compared with other path generation methods. Field experiments show that the proposed method is suitable for application to UAV atmospheric environment space detection. Considering the above arguments, it can be concluded that the still developing drone market, now and also in the future, can effectively support the activities of any environmental detection work. 

The article is convenient for publication, having taken into account the above comments.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx