Time Connection of Subsequent Construction Processes Estimated by Statistical Method
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I congratulate you on your work, it is really very interesting; however, here are some options for improvement.
0. Abstract
0.1 The gap or research problem that this research seeks to solve should be made explicit.
0.2 Although the objectives of the work are clear, the main aim of the work needs to be made explicit.
0.3 I recommend clearly separating the research goal and the method used to achieve it. Currently, it is mixed and confusing.
1. Introduction.
1.1. There are many statements that need to be referenced.
1.2 The statements about the Primavera P6 software should be justified with references.
1.3 In the introduction it is not clear what specific problem your research seeks to solve.
1.4 The literature review subsection I would put as a separate section from the introduction.
1.5 The literature review subsection should be shortened and better connected to the problem this research seeks to solve.
2. Material and Methods
2.1 You must explain why the case study method is functional to meet the objective of your research.
2.2 You should clarify how the conclusions obtained from the case study could be applied in other construction projects.
2.3 I recommend improving the diagrams in Figures 2 and 3. You should standardize schemes, explain the meaning of colors, etc.
2.4 It is necessary to connect all estimates and tests performed with the construction process.
2.5 Should review how to reference equations according to the journal format.
Material and Methods
2.1 You must explain why the case study method is functional to meet the objective of your research.
2.2 You should clarify how the conclusions obtained from the case study could be applied in other construction projects.
2.3 I recommend improving the diagrams in Figures 2 and 3. You should standardize schemes, explain the meaning of colors, etc.
2.4 It is necessary to connect all estimates and tests performed with the construction process.
2.5 Should review how to reference equations according to the journal format.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. I recommend improving the Figures (graphs). You could standardize the font (use the same as the journal), remove the titles of graphics (redundant with the title of the figure), remove the border of the graphics.
3.2. The discussion section should be improved. That is, it should be improved and more comparisons with similar studies should be made.
3.3. The practical contribution in the construction projects of your study should be made more explicit.
3.4 It is necessary to link your findings with the literature review section. If you can't, there are things in the literature review that should be removed.
4. Conclusion
4.1 Since the research problem (introduction) is not clear, the contribution to knowledge of your work is not entirely clear either.
4.2 It is necessary to define the practical contribution of your study: who does it serve? what is it useful for? what resources do you need to replicate it?
4.3 It is necessary to identify the limitations of your work.
4.4 It is necessary to consider the next steps of the research.
Author Response
The revision and correction of the article was performed according to the opponent's comments (red font for revision). Proofreading has been performed.
Darja Kubečková
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The topic of the article is worth attention and the statistics-based method proposed by the authors is of certain interest in planning activities for construction projects management. Nevertheless, the article requires improvements. In the following are reported detailed comments.
Introduction
The motivation of the work is clearly presented as well as the reference context. The contribution of the work is not particularly clear and must be better highlighted and stressed.
State of the art
The review of the literature is well structured and provides substantial discussion of the methods developed to monitor the construction processes efficiency. However the positing of the work with respect to the related literature must be improved, eventually including a dedicated section of paper contributions. Also, considered that authors present a discussion on simulation techniques for construction processes, it is meaningful to include also contributions related to the Petri nets formalism in its various typologies (e.g., stochastic, fuzzy), such as:
doi.org/10.1007/s10111-005-0010-z
https://doi.org/10.1080/02630259808970227
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1997)123:2(105)
https://doi.org/10.3182/20140514-3-FR-4046.00038
https://doi.org/10.1109/WODES.2016.7497824
Material and Methods
The section is well structured. I suggest a careful revision of the formulations, i.e., italics must be consistently used for variables, non-italics for parameters, etc., proper use of parenthesis and description of all the used notation.
Results and discussion
This section is well detailed.
CONTECT and CONTEC are used many times, are the same thing? please provide reference and describe briefly its content.
Please use Figure when referring to figures in the various sections, instead of using Picture.
Figure 5 the meaning of the label of x axis is not clear.
Minor comments
Various typos are present in the document that need to be corrected, e.g., the title of table 1.
Author Response
The revision and correction of the article was performed according to the opponent's comments (red font for revision). Proofreading has been performed.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have resolved all my comments.
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper has been improved and authors have satisfactorily addressed the previously raised issues.
