A New Modeling Method of Angle Measurement for Intelligent Ball Joint Based on BP-RBF Algorithm
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Collegues,
the paper is original: the idea to use ANN to control ball joint is interesting so as all the paper is a real proof of your good work completely aimed to implement real test. This part is even very good showing the realization of the ideas strongly supported by the results. On the contrary, the paper has some defciencies that must be resolved before the publication.
First of all, a better bibliography is a duty: beyond the specific topic (the control of ball joint) which could not have a wide bibliography, the methodologies used in this paper are common to many fields therefore the possibility to write some rows in which you say that "the ANN are very common and happily used in many field as…. From these application fields we imagined to use it for our problem in this way……" is important and allow to Readers to read better the paper. After I'll suggest some papers, but you consider that only as support for your work.
Second, a better explanation of your ANN is necessary, how is it done? why did you decide to use that configuration and not another? which paper or papers did you take inspiration from (put in bibliography)? You wrote something (lines 132-133) but too rough.
Third: comparison with other previous works are only hinted at, a paragraph that discusses it in more detail is necessary.
Fourth:The same observations, even if in lower tone, can be done even for the Hall sensors and their applications.
Here some titles of applications of Neural Network in different context but can be help you to wide your bibliography:
1) Cıbuk, M., Budak, U., Guo, Y., Cevdet Ince, M., Sengur, A.
Efficient deep features selections and classification for flower species recognition
DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2019.01.0412) Dedović, M.M., Dautbašić, N., Mujezinović, A.
Application of Artificial Neural Network and Empirical Mode Decomposition for Predications of Hourly Values of Active Power Consumption
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-02574-8_8
3) Ilić, S., Selakov, A., Vukmirović, S., Erdeljan, A., Kulić, F.
Short-term load forecasting in large scale electrical utility using artificial neural network
Hybrid neural networks as prediction models
(2010) Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 6114 LNAI (PART 2), pp. 88-95.
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-13232-2_125) Petrovskiy, D., Barashkov, A., Sobolevsky, V., Sokolov, B., Pjatkov, V.
On the real time logistics monitoring system development using artificial neural network
(2018) 20th International Conference on Harbor, Maritime and Multimodal Logistics Modeling and Simulation, HMS 2018, pp. 14-20.6) Caciotta, M., Giarnetti, S., Leccese, F., Orioni, B., Oreggia, M., Pucci, C., Rametta, S.
Flavors mapping by Kohonen network classification of Panel Tests of Extra Virgin Olive Oil
DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2015.09.0517) Caciotta, M., Giarnetti, S., Leccese, F.
Hybrid neural network system for electric load forecasting of telecomunication station
(2009) 19th IMEKO World Congress 2009, 1, pp. 586-590.
Another interesting paper could be the following:
Józwik, J.
(2018) 5th IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for AeroSpace, MetroAeroSpace 2018 - Proceedings, art. no. 8453523, pp. 576-580.
DOI: 10.1109/MetroAeroSpace.2018.8453523
Summarizing: The paper starts from a good base, but improvements are needed.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
I added the bibliography as you suggested. I have already marked out the corrected parts of the article in blue. For details, please see from the line 346 to the line 362 in the revised documents.
Thank you for your criticism and correction.
Yours sincerely:
Pro.Hu Penghao
Zhang YuanQi
Reviewer 2 Report
General comments: The topic of this paper is interesting and relevant. However, the paper is missing a solid structure and smooth, linear story line.
Also, a review of previous work (literature review) is missing. Such a review could also provide the authors with a baseline for what kind of accuracy is expected in the measurement of angles in a joint.
The experimental design is missing a lot of explanations. For example, how was the prototype aligned to the rotary table and angle encoder?
Some more specific comments:
In page 2, line 62 you introduce (B_u, B_v, B_w) but these variables are not revisited again in the paper. Are they supposed to be (B_x, B_y, B_z) or (B_x', B_y', B_z')? If not, what happened to them?
Page 3: The equations in Equation (1) have a Z component to the magnetic induction (B_z). Equation (2) shows the relationship between the measured magnetic induction intensity by the sensor B_S1 and the X and Y components. How do you get the Z component of the magnetic induction?
Page 3, line 75: Should B_1 be B_S1? And B2 --> B_S2? B3 --> B_S3?
Page 3, line 81: 'Accuracy' does not have a quantitative definition in the international vocabulary of metrology. I think you mean to use 'error'.
Page 3, line 82: 'achieved' should be changed to 'determined'
Page 4, section 2.1: Need to introduce 'BP' and 'RBF'.
Page 4, line 106: Never use vague terms, e.g. 'This is', in a new sentence. Be specific about what you're referring to.
Page 4, section 2.2: Is the purpose of the simulation to identify the minimum number of required sensors? How do you arrive at the choice to use 3 sensors in the experimental prototype?
Page 4, line 116: What are the parameters (W,b)? Introduce them.
Page 4, line 118: You refer to the 'ideal parameters'. What is the criterion for 'ideality' in parameters? Elaborate.
Page 4, line 121: You refer to 'required accuracy'? What is the requirement here? Elaborate.
Page 7, line 163: What is the K-means algorithm? Elaborate.
Page 8, figures: Is the color scale the same for all plots? Perhaps you should add a color bar?
Page 9, lines 189-190: How did you decide to use the sensors that you used? Why did you use two single-axis and one three-axis as opposed to, e.g. three three-axis sensors?
Page 9, line 203: What do you mean by 'the assemble accuracy of the sensors could be maintained'? Please rewrite more clearly.
Page 9, lines 205-206: I think you mean to write: "the angles of the three Hall sensor probes and the X-axis were ...". Also, remove ", respectively" from the end of the sentence; it is not correct in this sentence.
Page 9, lines 206-207: "A physical diagram" --> "An image". Also, can you please talk more about the prototype? For example, what material is it made from?
Pages 10-11, Section 3.2: This whole section seems a bit unnecessary as it doesn't add to the content of the paper.
Page 10, lines 215-216: Remove ", because Python language is easy to call library files and algorithm files in deep learning" as it is not suitable.
Page 12, line 242: Define 'precision'. I think you mean uncertainty or maximum permissible error?
Page 12, line 243: Define 'resolution'. I think you mean smallest indexed angle increment?
Page 12, line 244: Define 'accuracy'. I think you mean uncertainty or maximum permissible error?
For the past three comments, you need to think carefully about the terms you use when you specify the performance of an instrument. How are the quantities termed in the instrument specification sheet?
Page 12, line 254: You mention five magnetic sensors. I thought you only used three in the experimental testing?
Section 4 needs a thorough revisit. The explanation of the test is confusing and inadequate.
Page 12, lines 259-260: What do you mean by 'standard value'? Do you mean some kind of reference value? If so, where do you get the reference? Is is the indexed value from the turntables?
Page 12, line 267: "The maximum value of angle B error ..."
Page 12, line 270: The values 1'51" and 1'55" differ from previous average error values mentioned in the section. What is the relationship between these values and the previous ones?
Page 13, figure 13: X axis title 'Number of time' is strange. Do you mean 'Indexed angular step'? Also, the plotted data doesn't say much. Perhaps you're better off plotting the deviation between 'standard value' (i think you mean reference or indexed angle) and measured value.
Page 13, table 1: I think you're better off showing the deviations as opposed to the actual measured values.
Page 14, line 291: Again, what do you mean 'assembly accuracy'?
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
I revised the content of the article according to your suggestion. I have already marked out the corrected parts of the article in red. Thank you for your criticism and correction.
Yours sincerely:
Pro.Hu Penghao
Zhang YuanQi
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Problems signaled in attach.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
I revised the content of the article according to your suggestion. I have already marked out the corrected parts of the article in yellow.Thank you for your criticism and correction.
Yours sincerely:
Pro.Hu Penghao
Zhang YuanQi
Reviewer 4 Report
Paper can be accepted after following corrections:
Figure 6 is not clear. Please provide descriptive captions for each sub-figure. Axes should be clearly explained with sufficient quality and visible fonts. The figure should be self-explaining.
Conclusions should be developed and presented in quantitative way.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
I revised the content of the article according to your suggestion. I have already marked out the corrected parts of the article in green.Thank you for your criticism and correction.
Question 1: Figure 6 is not clear. Please provide descriptive captions for each sub-figure. Axes should be clearly explained with sufficient quality and visible fonts. The figure should be self-explaining. Conclusions should be developed and presented in quantitative way.
Response 1: I introduced in green in the revised document.
Yours sincerely:
Pro.Hu Penghao
Zhang YuanQi
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
In this latest version, the paper is clearer because the Authors have followed the indications of the Reviewers.
Author Response
You can give me more specific comments.Thank you for giving me advice.
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for considering my previous suggestions.
A few remaining points:
Line 71: "their magnetic induction values are" is repeated.
Line 93: "this is not leading to the real-time monitoring..." should be changed to "this does not allow for real-time monitoring..."
Lines 112-113: "unique best approximation characteristic" is this a known term? It sounds strange, please revisit.
Line 127: "whether the W and b" should be changed to "where W and b"
Line 134: "The first concerns" should be changed to "The first problem concerns"
Line 135: "The second is" should be changed to "The second problem is"
Line 138: "law" Are you sure this is the right word here?
Line 230: "because of the principle of magnetic effect" should be changed to "to avoid magnetic interference"
Line 233: "Its range of motion is..." Sentence is not complete.
Line 269: "incrementis" should be changed to "increment"
Figure 13: Needs to be improved, the quality is low.
Line 319: "assemble" should be changed to "assembly"
Author Response
Point 1:Line 71: "their magnetic induction values are" is repeated.
Response 1:I have corrected it roughened in red.
Point 2:Line 93: "this is not leading to the real-time monitoring..." should be changed to "this does not allow for real-time monitoring..."
Response 2:I have corrected it roughened in red.
Point 3:Lines 112-113: "unique best approximation characteristic" is this a known term? It sounds strange, please revisit.
Response 3:I have corrected it to "good approximation characteristic"roughened in red.
Point 4:Line 127: "whether the W and b" should be changed to "where W and b"
Response 4:I have corrected it roughened in red.
Point 5:Line 134: "The first concerns" should be changed to "The first problem concerns"
Response 5:I have corrected it roughened in red.
Point 6:Line 135: "The second is" should be changed to "The second problem is"
Response 6:I have corrected it roughened in red.
Point 7:Line 138: "law" Are you sure this is the right word here?
Response 7: I have corrected it "regular".
Point 8:Line 230: "because of the principle of magnetic effect" should be changed to "to avoid magnetic interference"
Response 8:I have corrected it roughened in red.
Point 9:Line 233: "Its range of motion is..." Sentence is not complete.
Response 9:I have corrected it to "from -20 to 20".
Point 10:Line 269: "incrementis" should be changed to "increment"
Response 10:I have corrected it roughened in red.
Point 11:Figure 13: Needs to be improved, the quality is low.
Response 11:I have corrected.
Point 12:Line 319: "assemble" should be changed to "assembly"
Response 12:I have corrected it roughened in red.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
