A Study of a Ride Comfort Control System for Ultra-Compact Vehicles Using Biometric Information

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In order to improve the ride quality of an ultra-compact vehicle, the correlation between the comfort felt by occupants and the comfort estimated from biological information are obtained by experiments in this submission. My comments are listed as follows

1 the abbreviations should be defined, like the AD, ECG

2 the measurement principle about the cerebral blood flow should be introduced detailly

3 the size of figure should be regulated to make it clear

4 the results and discussion in Section 8 should be improved, and more details of results with different frequencies should be discussed

5 the experiments with different road conditions and frequencies should be conducted

 

Author Response

Dear review 

Thank you for your comments.

Please see attached PDF.  

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments # 01: The introduction section is not clear. It is very broad and not at all comprehensively focused to relevance of the manuscript. It lists a lot of other people's research work, but it does not impress on readers the importance of this work, what is not solved in this field and why is it important. Therefore, as a reader, it is difficult to draw the conclusion from them as to why this study has been carried out. The authors need to discuss the previous work instead of only mentioning that author `A' did this and author `B' did this. In conclusion, there is not any insight into the physical description of the problem studied beyond the determination of a number of parameters by means of computing software.

Comments # 02: Many of the results and conclusions of this paper are quite basic. I recommend expanding: Introduction, Conclusions and the Results sections. The aim should be to: 1) give a broader view of the literature on the topic and the current state-of-the-art; 2) clarify and discuss the novelty and the significance of the results obtained here, and compare them with those available in the literature, also including discussions on potential applications; 3) complete the manuscript with some additional, less basic results. I cannot support publication unless the authors undertake all the above actions in full.

Comments #03: The following latest studies are very relevant. The authors must read and provide complete information on this topic through including these studies.

Lie symmetry analysis, new group invariant for the (3 + 1)-dimensional and variable coefficients for liquids with gas bubbles models, Construction of Lump and optical solitons solutions for (3 + 1)model for the propagation of nonlinear dispersive waves in inhomogeneous media. New exact solutions of Bratu Gelfand model in two dimensions using Lie symmetry analysis, Characteristics of melting heat transport of blood with time-dependent cross-nanofluid model using Keller–Box and BVP4C method. Engineering with Computers . Lie symmetry analysis, new group invariant for the (3+ 1)-dimensional and variable coefficients for liquids with gas bubbles models. The Method of Lines Analysis of Heat Transfer of Ostwald-de Waele Fluid Generated by a Non-uniform Rotating Disk with a Variable Thickness. A combined method for simulating MHD convection in square cavities through localized heating by method of line and penalty-artificial compressibility,

 Investigation of new solutions for an extended (2 + 1)-dimensional Calogero-Bogoyavlenskii-Schif equation.

Comments #04: The research problem in the paper does not seem to be motivated by a clearly outlined research question and no physical insight is provided for this theoretical analysis. So the authors need to address such deficiencies.

Comments #05: Authors should not only state what is shown, but it should be made clear to readers why the figure has been included and what is of interest. I see a string of four figures with no physical statement other than a technical statement what is shown i.e., increasing or decreasing. Why include figures if you have nothing to say about them physically?

Comments # 06: A schematic figure representing the physical phenomenon of problem studied needs to be included.

Comments #07: Should explain how accurate the results as compared the earlier results (with other methods).

Comments # 08: I need the clarification on the application of the problem studied.

Author Response

Dear review 

Thank you for your comments.

Please see attached PDF.  

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The Paper can be accepted in the present form