Energy Trading Strategy for Heat and Electricity-Coupled Microgrid Based on Cooperative Game
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
-Improve conclusion with respect to presented work facts and figures.. -include more reference and literature review to support study. -include comparative analysis with respect to recent research work.Author Response
Responses to Reviewer #1:
Reviewer #1:
Comment 1: -Improve conclusion with respect to presented work facts and figures.. -include more reference and literature review to support study. -include comparative analysis with respect to recent research work.
R1: Thank you for your suggestions. The conclusion of the revised manuscript has been modified according to the suggestions, and two strongly relevant reference documents have been added to the introduction. The modified parts have been marked in red in the revised manuscript.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The article is well-written, but there are a lot of rooms that can be improved:
- The methodology is explained really well, but the results are not presented comprehensively, making readers lost in the case study that can help them to understand the methodology better. Authors must improve the results section. Some formulas in methodology section can also be hidden in the Appendix.
- Authors have not explained the data used in the case study, such as study area, temporal scale of the data, source of data, etc.
- Conclusion section does not explain the overall findings. Authors must write not only how well the methodology works, but also how the methodology may be sensitive to the study cases (weakness of the methods that can be improved in the next studies).
Author Response
Responses to Reviewer #2:
Reviewer #2:
Comment 1: The article is well-written, but there are a lot of rooms that can be improved.
R1: Thank you for your affirmation.
Comment 2: The methodology is explained really well, but the results are not presented comprehensively, making readers lost in the case study that can help them to understand the methodology better. Authors must improve the results section. Some formulas in methodology section can also be hidden in the Appendix.
R2: Thank you for your suggestions. After repeated consideration, the authors think that the formula of the methodology part is difficult to hide in the appendix, which may easily lead to unclear description of methodology. The authors apply to retain the current writing method and ask the reviewer to agree.
Comment 3: Authors have not explained the data used in the case study, such as study area, temporal scale of the data, source of data, etc.
R3: Thank you for your comments. The data of heat load, electricity load, electricity prices and photovoltaic are the measurement data of three commercial buildings provided by Hefei Thermal Power Group and Anhui Electric Power Co., Ltd. The time scale of data is hourly. We have added these contents in Section 7.1, and marked them in red in revised manuscript.
Comment 4: Conclusion section does not explain the overall findings. Authors must write not only how well the methodology works, but also how the methodology may be sensitive to the study cases (weakness of the methods that can be improved in the next studies)..
R4: Thank you for your suggestion. We have modified the conclusion and marked them in red in revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Include comparative analysis of results with respect to recent published work if possible.
Author Response
Responses to Reviewer #1:
Reviewer #1:
Comment 1: Include comparative analysis of results with respect to recent published work if possible.
R1: Thank you for your suggestions. We have added the benefits comparisons with the method proposed in ref [20]. You can find these words in lines 370-381 of the revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
