Information Relaying Methods in VANET: Algorithms, Standards and Tests
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Regarding the models:
- The problem devoted to this paper is not explained very well in terms of originality. Here is an example of a published paper devoted to the same problem in a large vision:
Clustering scheme and destination-aware context-based routing protocol
for VANET - International Journal of Intelligent Networks
Regarding the methods:
- Data clustering is one of the NP-hard problems and hence difficult to solve using deterministic algorithms. Being an NP-hard problem, deterministic approaches cause local entrapment which in turn, affects the overall performance of the algorithm.
- K-means is one of the most popular algorithms to handle clustering problems. K-means algorithm is simple and efficient but the accuracy of its result is highly dependent on initially selected cluster centers, hence prone to trap in local optima solution.
- In the literature, many metaheuristics beat the K-means and their variants. I suggest using some standard metaheuristics such as GA to verify the robustness of the proposed methods.
The numerical results are very poor in terms of:
- Validation of proposed model and algorithms on a different case studies and different given environment
- In both proposed methods, there are two parameters. The authors should benchmark the impact of these parameters on the performance of the proposed methods.
- The figure representing the real case is not explained very well and it's not visible.
- Use different statistical metrics known in data clustering
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Abbreviations have to be defined at their first use location. For instance NLOS, NS-3 are not defined when they were used.
Please write Figure 1a instead of figure 1a. Fix this issue throughout.
vehicular ad hoc network (VANET) should be written in title case (each word).
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. should be terminated by colon.
The paper must be revised from language perspective. For example, showing in Figure... etc. are some serious mistakes must be fixed.
You should increase your citations from 15 to at least 20 or even more.
Author Response
please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The second version of the paper is presented and discussed very well in terms of methodology, proofs, and numerical results.