A Novel Adaptive Battery-Aware Algorithm for Data Transmission in IoT-Based Healthcare Applications
, Ali Hassan Sodhro 1,2,3, Mabrook S. Al-Rakhami 4,*, Noman Zahid 1, Sandeep Pirbhulal 5,* and Lei Wang 3Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper presents the novel contribution by developing the novel Battery-aware algorithms for data transmission in IoT-based smart healthcare applications. Authors have implemented and verified the algorithm on the hardware platform which is impressive research contribution. Paper is well-written, with clear and better format, sufficient experimental results and well-presented validation and proof. I have few suggestions.
Reviews to Authors
1. Authors have proposed the interesting battery-driven data transmission algorithms, can battery-aware algorithms be applicable for other applications such as, 5G-enable smart homes, smart cities and smart transportation applications? It shall be great if they shed some light on these aspects. Because their proposed research gives better insight for the healthcare domain.
2. How the battery-aware techniques are associated to the energy-based algorithms? What will be the connection between them in terms of power-saving, delay optimization and throughput enhancement?
3. Internet of medical things (IoMT) plays the key role in revolutionizing the healthcare, so is there any connection between IoT, BLE and healthcare applications? What will be standard used for BLE in the future experimental setup?
4. Fig 1, shows the wireless links, authors are suggested to keep the colour of these links as black and white instead of yellow.
Overall, paper has significant contributions, well-written and formatted structure with valid experimental setup, so I am accepting the paper in its current form.
Author Response
Reviewer #1:
This paper presents the novel contribution by developing the novel Battery-aware algorithms for data transmission in IoT-based smart healthcare applications. Authors have implemented and verified the algorithm on the hardware platform which is impressive research contribution. Paper is well-written, with clear and better format, sufficient experimental results and well-presented validation and proof. I have few suggestions.
Reviews to Authors
- Authors have proposed the interesting battery-driven data transmission algorithms, can battery-aware algorithms be applicable for other applications such as, 5G-enable smart homes, smart cities and smart transportation applications? It shall be great if they shed some light on these aspects. Because their proposed research gives better insight for the healthcare domain.
Answer: Thanks for your kind suggestions and motivation. Sure, battery-aware algorithms are also applicable to the other applications such as, smart cities and smart transportation. Because due to boom in the IoT devices at the edge of networks, it is easy to adopt these for advanced applications. We believe it is fine now, for further details see the revised version of our manuscript.
- How the battery-aware techniques are associated to the energy-based algorithms? What will be the connection between them in terms of power-saving, delay optimization and throughput enhancement?
Answer: Thanks a lot for your valuable feedback. ‘As battery charge consumption is directly proportional to the energy drain in portable IoT devices. Higher the energy efficiency, more the power saving and less the delay and maximum the throughput. Thus, it can be said that battery-aware and energy-based algorithms are linearly interconnected. For further details see the revised version of our manuscript.
- Internet of medical things (IoMT) plays the key role in revolutionizing the healthcare, so is there any connection between IoT, BLE and healthcare applications? What will be standard used for BLE in the future experimental setup?
Answer: Lots of thanks. Sure, there is a strong technological trend between IoT, BLE and smart healthcare applications. While ZigBee’s 1EEE 802.15.4 standard is considered for the BLE platform in most of the healthcare applications.
- Fig 1, shows the wireless links, authors are suggested to keep the colour of these links as black and white instead of yellow.
Answer: Thank you for your suggestion. Sure, we have re-drwan the Fig 1, with new wireless links, for further details see the Fig.1 in the revised version of our manuscript (Page 2).
Overall, paper has significant contributions, well-written and formatted structure with valid experimental setup, so I am accepting the paper in its current form.
Answer: Thanks a lot, for your kind motivation and consideration.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper proposed a Novel Adaptive Battery-aware Algorithm (ABA) for Data Transmission in IoT-based Healthcare Applications.
1) Please write the contributions in the separate section after the introduction section instead of mentioning them in the abstract.
2) The quality and presentation of the figures are not good. Please re-check them.
3) Prepare a comparison table that should mention the strengths and weaknesses of your proposed method as well as previous methods in different columns. Also, write a short description of all those methods in a separate column.
4) Again quality of figures in the results section is also very poor. The legend, axis, and title text are very blurred in Figures 8 and 9.
5) Caption should give some information about the figures and all the figures information should be consistent with each other.
Overall, the structure of the paper is not so good, it requires improvements in terms of figure qualities as well as a description of the methods.
Author Response
Reviewer #2:
The paper proposed a Novel Adaptive Battery-aware Algorithm (ABA) for Data Transmission in IoT-based Healthcare Applications.
1) Please write the contributions in the separate section after the introduction section instead of mentioning them in the abstract.
Answer: Thank you for your valuable and expert suggestion. Sure, we have written the contribution in the separate section at the end of introduction section (lines 105-111, Page 3). We believe it is fine now. For further details see the Introduction section in revised version of manuscript.
2) The quality and presentation of the figures are not good. Please re-check them.
Answer: Thanks a lot, for your valuable feedback and precious time. Sure, we have re-drawn all the figures and results by improving their visibility, quality and presentation. We believe it is fine now, for further details see Figs 1-10 in the revised version of our manuscript.
3) Prepare a comparison table that should mention the strengths and weaknesses of your proposed method as well as previous methods in different columns. Also, write a short description of all those methods in a separate column.
Answer: Thank you for your feedback, which really helped a lot to improve the quality of our manuscript. Sure, we have prepared the comparison table by presentating strengths and weaknesses of proposed algorithm and previous methods. Besides, we have written the short description of all the exisiting and proposed methods in the separate column. We believe it is fine now, for further details see Table. 4 (in Page.15) of revised Manuscript.
4) Again quality of figures in the results section is also very poor. The legend, axis, and title text are very blurred in Figures 8 and 9.
Answer: Thank you for your comments. Sure, we have re-drawn all the figures and improved their quality (Figs 1-10) with high visibility in the results section. In addition, legend, axis, title and text are very clear, with high visibility and improved quality in Figures 9 and 10 (in the revised manuscript) see page 14, lines 448 to 456. We believe it is fine now, for further details see the revised version of our manuscript.
5) Caption should give some information about the figures and all the figures information should be consistent with each other.
Answer: Lots of thanks for valuable suggestions and precious time. Sure, we have re-written the captions of all figures, and made these consistent and uniform in all figures. We believe it is fine now, for further details see the captions of Figs 1-10 in the revised version of our manuscript.
Overall, the structure of the paper is not so good, it requires improvements in terms of figure qualities as well as a description of the methods.
Thank you for your valuable suggestions, it helped to improve quality of our manuscript. Sure we have re-structured the paper by improving the quality of figures and re-writing the description of the methods. We believe it is fine now, for further details see the revised version of our manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Most of my comments are addressed. Thank you.
