A Carbon Benefits-Based Signal Control Method in a Connected Environment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReducing CO2 emissions is a very important factor for the survival of mankind, so any research that contributes to this is a priority. The lead-up to the article is appropriate and stimulates interest.
The paper discusses ways to reduce CO2 emissions from road transport. Starting from a standstill is one of the most energy-intensive activities in traffic, so the paper focuses on how to move faster through an intersection without slowing down.
It is detailed enough and presents the results in a convincing way. It details the emissions for a given and traffic complex intersection. At the end of the paper, it also presents a comparative analysis showing the CO2 emission reductions that can be achieved with well-organised traffic and appropriate traffic light control as a function of traffic flow.
The advantage of the paper is that it also presents a concrete calculation technique for reducing emissions through traffic management, so that another intersection can be modelled.
A shortcoming is the detailed presentation of further research directions and options. It would be essential to see in which direction the technology developed could be further developed.
There is research in traffic management and congestion reduction, and efforts are being made to control traffic lights according to traffic flow, but the advantage of this article is that it focuses on the emissions that can be reduced.
The conclusions drawn are well founded on the methodology presented. The conclusions drawn and the measurement results presented are convincing and demonstrate the amount of work the authors have put into the research.
The references are appropriate, relevant and timely. The lengthy introduction tries to introduce the novelty of the research discussed in the main body of the paper by presenting the background.
Typical typos and formatting errors were found.
In Figure 4 the font sizes are different, they need to be brought to the same size, enlarged. The title has been moved to a new page. The font size of formula 35 is too small.
Figure 7 the image does not add anything of substance to the paper, the mapping would be interesting, but Figure 1 is already included more visibly.
Figure 8's diagram is unusable because of the grey colours.
Figure 9 is slightly better, but the pastel colours should be replaced by more distinctive ones.
In Figure 10, the pale green colour is almost invisible, and it is recommended that the diagram be recoloured. Figure 11 is unusable at this size. It can only be interpreted after enlargement.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI recommend that authors review and update the references used to ensure that the introduction reflects the most current research in the field. This can be done by incorporating recent studies and publications that have emerged since the initial drafting of the text. Including recent research will not only strengthen the arguments presented but also enhance the relevance and impact of the work by aligning it with the latest advances in the area.
Furthermore, the use of the terms 'many studies' and 'numerous studies' in lines 43 and 65, respectively, without providing sufficient and current references makes the study appear poorly substantiated. Therefore, it is suggested that specific references be provided to support the claim or that the terms be altered.
The description of the method could be simplified to facilitate the replication of the study. The theoretical justification for using the Carbon Inclusion Mechanism (CIM) and speed-based signal control is well presented. However, the connection between the theory and practical application could be clearer. Therefore, it is recommended to provide a more detailed description of the CIM, including how it is implemented and what data is collected to calculate carbon rewards.
There is no section dedicated to discussion in the article. Therefore, it is suggested to include one and address the main results of the research, as well as their relevance. Additionally, relate the results to previous studies on the topic.
There is no section dedicated to practical and theoretical implications in the article; these are identified in the conclusion section. The article has a conclusion section that briefly addresses the discussion, implications, and limitations of the study. Therefore, it is suggested that the conclusion be expanded to better detail the main findings of the research. Additionally, create a dedicated section for practical and theoretical implications to make them more explicit and developed, as well as a section or subsection for limitations and future research
Comments on the Quality of English Language
To ensure that the article meets the linguistic and academic standards required by international journals, we recommend having a professional review of the English text. This will help enhance the clarity, flow, and accuracy of the language used, as well as ensure that all technical terms are correct and appropriately applied.
I suggest considering the services of specializes in academic and scientific reviews. They offer a detailed analysis of grammar, style, and consistency, ensuring that the manuscript is ready for publication in high-impact journals.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors conducted a literature review in which they discuss existing methods related to traffic signal control and emission reduction in the context of connected vehicles. The article refers to previous research on optimizing traffic signals to reduce the number of vehicle stops and emissions.
1. The literature review could be more comprehensive and include a broader spectrum of alternative approaches to the problem (e.g., Adaptive Traffic Signal Control Systems, metaheuristic optimization algorithms, Integrated Traffic Management Systems, etc.).
2. The research problem is clearly articulated. The authors focus on the issue of reducing carbon dioxide emissions at urban intersections through the optimization of traffic signals and the use of the Carbon Inclusion Mechanism (CIM). The authors present a detailed methodology that includes a two-level optimization model. The methodology is appropriately tailored to the research objective, but it may be worth considering other approaches, such as more advanced simulations based on real-world traffic scenarios.
3. The authors conducted tests in a simulated environment, which allows for conclusions regarding the effectiveness of the method. However, the analysis could be enriched with a discussion of the potential limitations of the method and its effectiveness under different traffic conditions.
A small linguistic note: in some places the sentences are very complex, which can make it difficult to read and understand the text fluently. Consider breaking up long sentences into shorter ones to increase clarity.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageA small linguistic note: in some places the sentences are very complex, which can make it difficult to read and understand the text fluently. Consider breaking up long sentences into shorter ones to increase clarity, eg. lines 42, 50, 58, 63, 104.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn the current version, the authors have added new references and expanded the literature discussion, including more recent publications and alternative approaches. They discussed other analysis methods, such as comparing results with different analysis methods and using more advanced optimization algorithms. The authors have enriched the results analysis by adding a discussion on the limitations of their method and its applicability under various traffic conditions and scenarios.
