A Lightweight Uav Swarm Detection Method Integrated Attention Mechanism

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Authors of this paper propose a lightweight UAV swarm de- 18 tection method integrated attention mechanism by referring to YOLOX. The paper is well written as far as it goes and the treated problem is clear.

Please include the achieved performance IN NUMBERS at the end of the abstract

The related work is more YOLO-oriented rather than swarm detection oriented. Besides, A comparative table clearly showing the position of this work compared to what has been already done is highly recommended.

The use of YOLO should also be more justified. We all agree that transfer learning methods are the fastest and easiest way in any object detection problem. However, we should justify all the hyper parameters.

Any reader can easily see that this work is more machine learning oriented and the obtained results are very expected. Since you apply it for the context of UAVs, more UAVs-related performance evalaluation should be discussed including energy, throughput, bandwidth occupency and PDR.

Many relevent and related works have been omitted including:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10462-022-10281-7

https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/11/7/1128

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11276-022-03031-8

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11721-022-00218-9

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9842808

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript. We really appreciate all your comments and suggestions. Please find our itemized responses in below and revisions in the re-submitted files.

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Chuanyun Wang

E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors proposed a lightweight UAV Swarm detection method that is interesting and intuitive. The results are satisfactory even though they don't demonstrate much significance.

 

The quality of the paper acceptable and well structured. However, the authors need to address the following points to show the significance of the work:

 

*  I advise thorough proofreading because the manuscript's grammar and punctuation are generally average.

 

* Correct any acronyms used before its definition and the syntax in few places where the abbreviation precedes its phrase enclosed with parentheses.

 

* The introduction is very brief and should be improved.

* The inference process is crucial, especially for applications that require low latency. The inference process is not mentioned anywhere in the manuscript, and the authors must include a section with detailed steps and a performance comparison between different methods.

 * Clarification is need on whether the dataset used includes noise (other objects than UAVs: swarm of birds, etc.)

 

* The paper concluded that the model is suitable for real-world environments. This assertion needs to be supported by a comprehensive analysis on the inference process, because it is an important step after the training, during which the real-time detection system is going to be used all the time.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

We thank you for the critical comments and helpful suggestions. We have taken all these comments and suggestions into account, and we have made major corrections in the revised manuscript. 

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Chuanyun Wang

E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Acronyms present in Abstract must be explicated .

The related work paragraph is well detailed and all the used modules are presented ( in particular the object and the UAV detection). The idea tu use  a lightweight network  for multi-objective seems promising and results suggest it is the correct path to follow. Materials and Methods section is well configured and well explained. All the mechanism process are described and detailed. Even if it is not my exact field of research, I could understand what is the process of that allows for a lightweight convolution. Results are cleri highlighted and explained.

the paper seems very interesting in the conclusions, hope is that it is not used only for military swarms but also in the civil society for all humankind.

There are two figures 11, please correct.

There  are some capital letters after semicomas, please correct 

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you for your comments and suggestions concerning our manuscript. The comments and suggestions are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding signification to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. 

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Chuanyun Wang

E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Authors addressed some of my comments but not all of them. Especially regarding the performance evaluation and the related works!

Following the authors responses, I believe that either the whole paper structure and title should revised to focus only on objects detection or consider including UAVs swarm papers and performance to make this paper more coherent with the title as well as the journal!

Author Response

We really appreciate all your valuable comments and suggestions. Please find our itemized responses in below and revisions in the re-submitted files.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

* Line 41: I am not sure I understand what "UAV and anti-UAV confrontation normalization" means!

* Line 44: This sentence looks like a run-on paragraph. Please reformulate and simplify the sentence.

* Line 47: replace "It is urgent to be able" by "It is imperative to be able"

* Line 47: Too long a sentence. To avoid any confusion, it is better to split it in two sentences or reformulate. The expression "incoming UAV swarm" is repeated twice in the sentence, once at the beginning and once at the end of the sentence.

* Line 60: What do you mean by  "location of the 60 anti-UAV system."? Please reformulate this sentence.

* Line 61: Replace "is found to be coming" by "is detected"

* There are still too many other mistakes which need correction.

 

Author Response

We thank you for the critical comments and helpful suggestions. We have taken all these comments and suggestions into account, and we have made major corrections in the revised manuscript. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf