Methodology for Searching Representative Elements
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors!
I have read your work, and I'm satisfied with the content. It is a not exactly a totally new approach, but I se potential especially in industrial practice, as you already do implement it. The main problem was with your English and grammar. I find lots of comma and word change problems. I marked them and give an option in your PDF. I also asked you 2 questions; they are in the comment section of the work, please try to answer it in your work.
I also have a problem with the Conclusion. For me it seems a little bit rushed, please consider it and if needed please rewrite it.
Overall it is a good work with some minor flaws.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for your thorough review.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In the current time of Industry 4.0, where the production type of high-mix low-volume is again becoming more and more global, the development of new optimization methods and methodologies for searching representative elements is very important. The authors present a new methodology for searching representative elements related to mass, size, price and production time.
The presented article is overall well written and it presents the most important steps taken in the research. On the other hand, I have listed some deficiencies below. The authors demonstrate a high level of knowledge in the presented research area, which is also reflected in their previously published research work.
Comments:
Sometimes authors use word optimization in other case they use word optimisation (line 20, 62).
Line 48, 20 to 50 per cent, I suggest use of symbol %, because it is used throughout other text.
In section 2, in line 91, artificial intelligence, I suggest to mention some of the most relevant AI methods to described research field, add relevant literature that the reader can easily access to it.
Line 96 use of double spaces (…Analysis. The….). Line 147, weight function, use of weight function must be more detailed described, why and with whit limitation, it is used?
General comment-suggestion regarding notation of equations, I suggest one initial notation of all abbreviation’s. It would be much easier to read the paper for the readers. Line 205 MR , R should be in index.
Check and unify writing and quoting of the indents. Sometime you use small letter and dots, on the other case you use capital letter and commas etc. Check also line spacing. In the section experiment, in line 258, the clustering technology is mentioned, here you should add some more details regarding mentioned approach, add some more relevant literature. In your case, reader must explain this part of the text on its own, it would be much easier to have more detailed explanation given from you.
In the line 251, you mentioned that you use data from the 2012 to 2016, but in the next text and tables, we can see only data from 2012 to 2015. It is not clear described, please unify and explain more clearly.
In the section Experimental (I suggest amendment of the title: Experiment or Experiment design etc.), from the data in Table 3 you have used only Module 7 data as a reference data, but I am wondering what would happen if you would use all data and its deviations. Question, how would this influence on experimental results?
In the section, Experiment and Simulation I am missing comparison of your proposed method with currently existing AI methods in this research filed. Comparison would ensure credibility of simulation and numerical results, only in this case you can claim the efficiency of your proposed method.
Line 344, 345, you have mentioned that the reasonable number of representatives to be selected is 6, 11 or 17, but why, reader needs quite some time to explain to himself why. You must add more detailed explanation regarding selected reasonable number of representatives.
Section Results must be supplemented by a detailed description of the numerical and simulation results. One simple real world example of the layout would be very nice to add here, to show the reader what is the final results (added value) of your proposed method.
Line 407, double space,
Line 411, missing pages numbers,
Line 413, missing :,
In the section references unify the doi code record,
Line 423, missing .,
Line 431, missing paper pages.
Author Response
Thank you for your thorough review.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
