Next Article in Journal
Federated Auto-Meta-Ensemble Learning Framework for AI-Enabled Military Operations
Next Article in Special Issue
Anti-Jamming Low-Latency Channel Hopping Protocol for Cognitive Radio Networks
Previous Article in Journal
A Fuzzy-Based Evaluation of E-Learning Acceptance and Effectiveness by Computer Science Students in Greece in the Period of COVID-19
Previous Article in Special Issue
Sequential Transient Detection for RF Fingerprinting
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Trust-Degree-Based Secure Relay Selection in SWIPT-Enabled Relay Networks

Electronics 2023, 12(2), 429; https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12020429
by Ran Gao 1, Ling Xu 2, Dan Xu 3 and Jianrong Bao 2,4,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Electronics 2023, 12(2), 429; https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12020429
Submission received: 23 October 2022 / Revised: 5 December 2022 / Accepted: 10 January 2023 / Published: 13 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Application of Wireless Signal Processing & Network)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper titled "Trust-degree-based Secure Relay Selection in SWIPT-enabled Relay Networks" is a promising paper. However, I have some concerns and recommendations for the improvement of the paper. 

1. In the abstract you need to mention how significant the energy consumption reduction is. 

2. The literature review is not provided in the introduction or as a separate section. Overall, the number of references is limited.

3. why did you set the energy conversion efficiency η = 0.99, and the confidential information rate threshold to R = 0.5 Mbps?

3.  Discussion section would be nice if you added it so that we can see what is the differences between the proposed method and the literature.

4. The paper needs justification with experimental values.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Although this paper contains a certain level of novelty, the following limitations need to be resolved to be  considered for publication.

First, the proposed scheme needs to be compared to other related work unless it is the first work and thus there are no other work to be compared.

Second, this paper contains many mathematical equations. However, the explanation of implications of these equations is not enough. Authors need to add more explanation regarding these equations.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors, 

Thank you for addressing my concerns. But I still think there should be an experimental validation for the proposed model. 

Thank you.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

It seems like, I couldn't get answers to most part of my questions. I still have concerns about the experimental validation of your results.

Thank you.

 

Back to TopTop