Improving Air Transportation by Using the Fuzzy Origin–Destination Matrix

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

- formulas 3 to 7 contain a wrong notation because at  first member there are the indexes i,j  fixed

while the same indexes are variable

- formula 2 is a fuzzy triangular number? Hence if yes, give therelated properties

- the last row of page 3 contains two symbols repeated

this paper is badly written, the english is bad. The following remarks are to be taken into consideration:

- formula 8 is unclear. What represent the coefficients?

- “The target function (10) is not linear” is a wrong claim because min(a,b)=(a+b-|a-b|)/2, a,b reals. So also the max dually

- formula 14 is not justified and it is not mathematically correct

- in the discussion there are other formulas firstly not recalled

Author Response

- formulas 3 to 7 contain a wrong notation because at first member there are the indexes i,j  fixed
while the same indexes are variable
formulas from 3 to 7 have been corrected
- formula 2 is a fuzzy triangular number? Hence if yes, give therelated properties
formula (2’) has been added
- the last row of page 3 contains two symbols repeated
Corrected (lines 177-185)
this paper is badly written, the english is bad.
Many edits were made to the text.
The following remarks are to be taken into consideration:
- formula 8 is unclear. What represents the coefficients?
Clarification has been added (lines 177-185)
- “The target function (10) is not linear” is a wrong claim because min(a,b)=(a+b-|a-b|)/2, a,b reals. So also the max dually
Corrected at line 187
- formula 14 is not justified and it is not mathematically correct
Correction has been made
- in the discussion there are other formulas firstly not recalled
Discussion section has been rewritten

Reviewer 2 Report

The author presents a fuzzy origin–destination matrix for improving air transportation. This paper is interesting. It can be published with some revisions: However it needs some improvements as follows:

1. The introduction should highlight the novelty and motivation of study, not only put some literature without any useful explanation, in fact, the introduction should be clearly stated research questions and targets first. Then answer several questions: Why is the topic important (or why do you study on it)? What are the research questions? What has been studied? What are your contributions? Why is to propose this particular method?
2. The literature review (LR) in introduction section shoudl be moved new sections and LR is not presented in a good structure, and at the end of LR you should come out with a paragraph to conclude your discussion, in this paragraph you can highlight the novelty of your study also, it means, what the LR done and what you want do. The literature review must highlight the novelty and contribution of the study, but these sections which authors provided only are related works and not literature review, authors must carefully revise these sections.
3. Some related papers should be mentioned in the manuscript such as: (i) Novel search space updating heuristics-based genetic algorithm for optimizing medium-scale airline crew pairing problems. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 10(1), 1082-1101. (ii) A Novel Methodology for Prioritizing Zero-Carbon Measures for Sustainable Transport. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27, 1093-1112.
4. The research approach of this study is not clear.
5. The research strategy of the study is not provided. What kind of strategy did you use for this study? Did you perform any interviews?
6. Another important weakness of the paper is related to discussion, the authors never discussed about the results of the study and never provided arguments why did you conduct this study, also never discussed about the benefits of the proposed method, also, how practitioners can use the proposed method in the real life problems, how the proposed method is useful for future studies.
7. The conclusion section is another weakness in this study, the conclusion section is not useful, authors need to conclude their work in-depth, the limitations and recommendations for future studies should be provided in the paper, not only simply other studies can do that, can do this, authors need to discuss about the limitations of the proposed method as well as case study limitations, what are your recommendations for future works, how the proposed method solved the case study problem.
8. What are the advantages of the proposed method?
9. The flowchart of proposed method should be added in the manuscript.
10. Validation is impartant. Comparative analaysis should be done.

Author Response

1. The introduction should highlight the novelty and motivation of study, not only put some literature without any useful explanation, in fact, the introduction should be clearly stated research questions and targets first. Then answer several questions: Why is the topic important (or why do you study on it)? What are the research questions? What has been studied? What are your contributions? Why is to propose this particular method?

added in lines 37-62

 

2. The literature review (LR) in introduction section shoudl be moved new sections and LR is not presented in a good structure, and at the end of LR you should come out with a paragraph to conclude your discussion, in this paragraph you can highlight the novelty of your study also, it means, what the LR done and what you want do. The literature review must highlight the novelty and contribution of the study, but these sections which authors provided only are related works and not literature review, authors must carefully revise these sections.

 

Refactoring literature review lines 63-119.

 

3. Some related papers should be mentioned in the manuscript such as: (i) Novel search space updating heuristics-based genetic algorithm for optimizing medium-scale airline crew pairing problems. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 10(1), 1082-1101. (ii) A Novel Methodology for Prioritizing Zero-Carbon Measures for Sustainable Transport. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27, 1093-1112.

 

added in literature positions 13 and 14.

 

4. The research approach of this study is not clear.

The text is added and the formulas are corrected. (lines 152-194)

 

5. The research strategy of the study is not provided. What kind of strategy did you use for this study? Did you perform any interviews?

 

We use action-oriented research: This refers to practical business research which is directed towards a change or the production of recommendations for change. Action-oriented research is a participatory process which brings together theory and practice, action and reflection. The project is often carried out by insiders. Since the author has had to develop several commercial business systems for aviation planning, he can be considered as an insider. This is because it is grounded in the need to actively involve participants in order for them to develop ownership of the project. After the project, participants will have to implement the change. Although no formal survey was conducted, the mission statement stems from communication with federal aviation authorities and analysis of other research issues.

 

6. Another important weakness of the paper is related to discussion, the authors never discussed about the results of the study and never provided arguments why did you conduct this study, also never discussed about the benefits of the proposed method, also, how practitioners can use the proposed method in the real life problems, how the proposed method is useful for future studies.

 

The discussion has been changed (lines 347-364 )

 

 

7. The conclusion section is another weakness in this study, the conclusion section is not useful, authors need to conclude their work in-depth, the limitations and recommendations for future studies should be provided in the paper, not only simply other studies can do that, can do this, authors need to discuss about the limitations of the proposed method as well as case study limitations, what are your recommendations for future works, how the proposed method solved the case study problem.

Added to conclusion (lines 367-380)

 

8. What are the advantages of the proposed method?

Added to conclusion (lines 387-391).

 

9. The flowchart of proposed method should be added in the manuscript.

The flowchart added as figure 1 line 222.

 

10. Validation is important. Comparative analysis should be done.

Added to result and discussion (lines 342-391).

 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

read the pdf enclosed

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

- since from formula 2, it i unclear how xmin and xmax are defined. Why are these symbols are used? This ij ij reflects also on formulas 2’ and ff.

Changed indices in formulas (2), (2’), 5-14

- it is not clear how are defined the indices i*, j*

Added lines 154-159 with definitions. And add lines 168-173 and formula (3’) with some descriptions and examples

- there are problems on formulas 3 and 4: it is not possible to define at first member the min (max) using the same variables which stand at right member, maybe the author should prefer to use this symbology min ** max ** max{x i j i

Modified formula (3) and (4) and add lines 168-173 and formula (3’) with some descriptions and examples.

- of course in tables the symbols must be changed and this depends from which symbols the author shall decide to adopt

In tables and in text and in formulas symbols was changed (lines 154-206, 234-254, 286, 294).

Reviewer 2 Report

All issues have been successfully addressed by authors. Therefore, it can be accepted from my side.

Author Response

Thank you!

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

publish as stands