Fuzzy Model Parameter and Structure Optimization Using Analytic, Numerical and Heuristic Approaches

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

A fuzzy model parameter and structure optimization method is proposed in this paper.  

1. It is recommended to merge the literature review and introduction into one chapter.

2. How to determine if RMSE is optimal at this moment?

3. Figure 2 lacks horizontal and vertical coordinates and color markings.

4. The algorithm presented in this article has shown good RMSE in many cases, but in what aspects are there shortcomings compared to other algorithms?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

It is an interesting topic regarding “Fuzzy Model Parameter and Structure Optimization Using Analytic, Numerical and Heuristic Approaches”. This paper should be revised as per the below comments. 

·         It is not common to use citations in the Abstract section.

·         The introduction section needs revisions so as to be written more coherently and concisely.

·         The authors should emphasize the importance of your work.

·         The Literature Overview must be added as a separate section. The Literature Overview must have a logical sequence contemplating the description of the work topic, research problem (threshold of knowledge), justification, hypotheses, and objectives. Also, papers listed below should be added into the Literature Overview section:

https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/12/8/1166

https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/12/8/1256

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00521-021-06600-8

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10064-022-02869-8

 ·         The Conclusion section of the work should be rephrased and expanded to enhance the readership quality and be well written scientifically.

Firstly, your work is highly compelling, and it's clear that significant effort and passion have gone into it. However, there are areas where the English language use could be improved to ensure your intended message is delivered clearly and effectively. Currently, the manuscript requires extensive editing to ensure grammatical accuracy, coherent flow, and correct typographical errors. This is crucial in maintaining the reader's engagement and preserving the work's credibility and professionalism. There are also instances where the sentence structure is somewhat complex, leading to a loss of clarity. Breaking down these sentences and simplifying the language would help maintain a clear narrative throughout your manuscript. In terms of vocabulary, I would recommend revising certain terms and phrases to ensure they are appropriate for the intended audience. Using jargon or overly complex terminology may limit the accessibility of your work, and you want as wide an audience as possible to appreciate your research. Lastly, there are certain sections where the overall cohesion of ideas could be improved. The manuscript would benefit from a more linear narrative flow to ensure that the content is accurate and easy to follow and understand. Despite these language issues, the essence of your work is genuinely intriguing. Once these issues are addressed, your manuscript will be much stronger and more engaging. I recommend engaging a professional English language editor or proofreader who could assist you in enhancing your manuscript's language, readability, and overall quality.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Please find the attached file, for the improvement of this article.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

In this article, the authors propose an optimization approach by RMSE error. The simulation results show that the performance improvement is about 28%, and the effectiveness is confirmed. The reviewer has some comments here and hopes they help improve the resulting quality.

1. Four cases are considered to evaluate the proposed approach performance, and the criteria is RMSE. It is better to consider more criteria to prove the effectiveness ultimately.

2. The initial values of the parameters in Algorithm 3 are referred to Garcia’s result since the parameter setting induces excellent results. However, are the parameters also appropriate to the proposed approach? This should be verified to confirm the feasibility.

Also, please recheck the writing to improve the manuscript quality. For example, a full stop and a comma are missed at the end of Eq. (3) and Eq. (24), respectively.

The English is easy to read, but the technical writing should be improved for better manuscript quality.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Well revision and can be published in this form.

Reviewer 2 Report

All the reviewer's comments have been addressed. I recommend publishing the paper in its current form. 

Reviewer 4 Report

All issues have been addressed, and the authors also reply that the manuscript has been modified by a certified English language expert from the cover letter. The reviewer has no further comments, and the manuscript could be accepted.