Enhancing Energy Efficiency by Improving Internet of Things Devices Security in Intelligent Buildings via Niche Genetic Algorithm-Based Control Technology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The author has studied the energy-saving optimization of intelligent buildings which is focused on assuring the security of IoT devices. The subject of the paper appears to be interesting and the paper has been fairly organized and presented well. However, the authors should consider the following comments:

1.     The abstract should be properly linked with the Niche Genetic Algorithm (NGA).

2.     In the “Introduction” section, the motivation behind using the NGA is not sufficient.

3.     What is the Novelty of using the NGV compared to the new optimization algorithms such as nature-inspired algorithms?

4.     The related works are too weak so the author should improve it with more recent works. 

5.     The formulae are not well explained and are hard to understand.

6.     The fitness function in Formula 2-4 It is not clear how the quality of the results produced in the experiments can measured.

7.     For what purpose assumption is mentioned in the paper? A description is missing, it needs to be added.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors The author has studied the energy-saving optimization of intelligent buildings which is focused on assuring the security of IoT devices. The subject of the paper appears to be interesting and the paper has been fairly organized and presented well. However, the authors should consider the following comments:

1. The abstract should be properly linked with the Niche Genetic Algorithm (NGA).
   Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have made changes in the abstract of the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the abstract of the revised manuscript.
2.  In the “Introduction” section, the motivation behind using the NGA is not sufficient.
   Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have made changes in the introduction section of the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the introduction section of the revised manuscript.
3.  What is the Novelty of using the NGV compared to the new optimization algorithms such as nature-inspired algorithms?
   Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. We have discussed the importance of the proposed scheme in the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the revised manuscript.
4. The related works are too weak so the author should improve it with more recent works.
   Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have improved the related work section of the revised manuscript. For reference, please see Section 2 of the revised manuscript. 
5. The formulae are not well explained and are hard to understand.
   Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have explained the formulas of the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the revised manuscript. 
6. The fitness function in Formula 2-4 It is not clear how the quality of the results produced in the experiments can measured.
   Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have made changes accordingly. For reference, please see the revised manuscript. 
7. For what purpose assumption is mentioned in the paper? A description is missing, it needs to be added.
   Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have explained the complete scenario of the results and assumptions in the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the results section of the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study focuses on a relevant area and is technically well-founded. However, the scientific component has several vulnerabilities. The impact of the results should also be better assessed and explained.

Improvement suggestions:

1. The description of IoT in the introduction section should also be based in the literature. Some references regarding this topic are not presented.

2. Associate the concept of energy sustainable to the emergence of sustainable development goals proposed by the United Nations.

3. Explain the reasons that turn genetic algorithms more adequate to solve these kind of problems in the energy field when compared to other approaches like simulated annealing or tabu search, among others.

4. I recommend the authors to explicitly present the research hypothesis that will guide the authors to analyze the relevance of the results.

5. After this paragraph “This paper proposed…” appear two more paragraphs that repeat some words. These observations can be joint in a single paragraph.

6. Explain how the Figure 4 was built. Based in several trials performed by the researchers or it is based on the literature.

7. Experimental setup should not be mixed with the presentation of results. I recommend the authors to present a section to present the results.

8. The discussion of the results is very weak. I recommend the authors to present a Discussion section and compare the obtained results vs. the literature results.

9. Conclusion section needs to be reformulated. Present the theoretical and practical contributions. Also present the limitations of the study. Propose also future research directions.

10. More references should be used.

Can be improved in some parts, mainly in the Introduction section. 

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The study focuses on a relevant area and is technically well-founded. However, the scientific component has several vulnerabilities. The impact of the results should also be better assessed and explained.
Improvement suggestions:
1. The description of IoT in the introduction section should also be based in the literature. Some references regarding this topic are not presented.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have made changes in the literature of the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the related work section of the revised manuscript.
2. Associate the concept of energy sustainable to the emergence of sustainable development goals proposed by the United Nations.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have made changes in the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the revised manuscript.
3. Explain the reasons that turn genetic algorithms more adequate to solve these kinds of problems in the energy field when compared to other approaches like simulated annealing or tabu search, among others.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have explained the use of genetic algorithm in the methodology section of the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the methodology section of the revised manuscript.
4. I recommend the authors to explicitly present the research hypothesis that will guide the authors to analyze the relevance of the results.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have made changes accordingly in the revised manuscript. For reference, please see Section 4 of the revised manuscript.
5. After this paragraph “This paper proposed…” appear two more paragraphs that repeat some words. These observations can be joint in a single paragraph.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have made changes accordingly. For reference, please see the revised manuscript.
6. Explain how the Figure 4 was built. Based in several trials performed by the researchers or it is based on the literature.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have explained Figure 4 in the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the revised manuscript.
7. Experimental setup should not be mixed with the presentation of results. I recommend the authors to present a section to present the results.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have made changes in Section 4 of the revised manuscript. For reference, please see Section 4 of the revised manuscript.
8. The discussion of the results is very weak. I recommend the authors to present a Discussion section and compare the obtained results vs. the literature results.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have made changes in Section 4 of the revised manuscript by explaining all the experiments and the results attained via each experiment. Further, we have compared the proposed work with the earlier approaches as well. For reference, please see Section 4 of the revised manuscript.
9. Conclusion section needs to be reformulated. Present the theoretical and practical contributions. Also present the limitations of the study. Propose also future research directions.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have improved the conclusion section of the revised manuscript. For reference, please see conclusion section of the revised manuscript.
10. More references should be used.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have added more recent and related references in the revised manuscript. For reference, please see the references section of the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors address all the comments from first round

Author Response

All the reviewer comments have been successfully addressed. 

Reviewer 2 Report

I recommend the authors to improve the literature review section. More references are needed to support the vision of IoE (Internet of Energy).

It is fine. 

Author Response

All the reviewer comments have been successfully addressed.