Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

There are some comments to improve the paper:

1. The literature review is too short and do not include enought number of scientific publications. Please, extend it.

2. The authors have to proved methodological stages to get clear picture about research design

3. Before conncluding the authors have to present discussion. Herein, it is reccomended to show which theoretical gaps exists and which of them are solved in this paper.

4. Disscussion section should also include further research directions.

5. Counclussions section is too short and have to be extended.

6. By the end of conclussions the author have to provide limitations of their research.

7. The list of literature has to be extended to 30 papers, including contemprorary ones.

8. The authors have to move the reference [3] from conclussions section to discussion section.

9. The English text has to be revised with advanced Grammarly tool, as it has style and writing errors.

10. Please, revise problem statement as it starts with formula presentation. It is recommended to present the broader description of problem.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article addresses the problem of warehouse management, which is present in most warehouse management systems and significantly impacts the efficiency of warehouse operations. For this reason, taking up this issue, the authors are justified.

The authors propose a simplified model of organizing orders through batching, partly connected with the routing problem. The authors cross-research several order-batching approaches and several ways to solve the problem. Thus, they investigate several scenarios.

The article uses the simplified model of Kulak et al., and its novelty consists in subjecting it to additional modifications.

The article is written in good language, with knowledge of the subject, and is thematically relevant to Applied Sciences. In my opinion, it could improve in quality with the following comments:

1 / The literature review is very sparse. The studied issue has been the subject of many studies and has been recognized very well; therefore, more emphasis should be placed on the literature review in order-picking organization and routing. Classical studies (e.g., de Koster) were cited, but they gave rise to a series of works.

2 / The part of the article devoted to formulating the research problem in the field of storage technology should be developed better to present the specific area of ​​order-batching and routing. Schematic drawings of the issues discussed could be a good help. One should also distinguish between the problems of multi-order picking and batch-picking, including cases where the order is greater than the batch and must be divided between batches.

3 / The optimal order picking route is constructed based on the number of picking items - is this the optimal approach? Perhaps the drawing would allow for a better presentation of the issue of Initial Picking Routes.

4 / The vehicle capacity is not defined in the mathematical model. However, it is a limitation in the calculation at a later stage.

5 / The units in Figs. 1 and 2 are not described; moreover, the solid lines used in the graphs also indicate the continuity of the function, which is discrete.

6/ The summary is pretty sparse. There are no clear recommendations for practical applications. Authors should discuss the results in which they present applicable guidelines for order-batching in the light of their research.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for your efforts

Author Response

We sincerely thank Reviewer #1 for your valuable comments.