Governance Framework for Intelligent Digital Twin Systems in Battery Storage: Aligning Standards, Market Incentives, and Cybersecurity for Decision Support of Digital Twin in BESS

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study provides an original framework to align technical standards, market incentives, and cyber-security measures for digital twin adoption in battery storage systems worldwide. The study integrates technical depth by outlining digital twin architecture, data handling protocols, and system integration considerations with governance insights on industry standards, market design, regulation, and security. The framework addresses fragmented standards and interoperability gaps, proposes market and regulatory mechanisms to reward the added value from digital twins, and emphasizes cyber-secure practices to safeguard these critical energy assets.

Comments:
- Point one:
The title of the study is too long. My suggestion, the authors have to to revise the title.
- Point 2:
The abstract is missing some importants parts like the main findings of the research and the main contributions in briefly. My suggestion, the authors have to to revise the abstract.
- Point 3:
I noticed that the section 1.3 not include any references to support the claims in the paragraph regarding the cybersecurity challenges. This make it very weak. The authors have to add some recent studies that support these claims. You can use these studies: -  Risk auditing for Digital Twins in cyber physical systems: A systematic review. Also The study - Adversarial attack detection in industrial control systems using LSTM-based intrusion detection and black-box defense strategies. My suggestion, the authors have to to revise this section.
- Point 4:
Add review studies section or related works to discuss the recent proposed frameworks.
- Point 5:
The authors have to discuss the main cybersecurity issues and threats based on cybersecurity frameworks like NIST. Use these studies: - Analyzing cybersecurity risks and threats in IT infrastructure based on NIST framework. And this - Insider Threats in Banking Sector: Detection, Prevention, and Mitigation. 
- Point 6:
Discuss the novelty of the research.
- Point 7:
Discuss the main contributions of the research. 
- Point 8:
Add future works. 

Author Response

Please see attached word file. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for the opportunity to review this interesting and well-organized paper. I think the manuscript does a great job outlining a governance framework around digital-twin-enabled battery systems, especially the integration of standards, market incentives, and cybersecurity. The examples are compelling, and the structure makes it easy to follow. Overall, the paper is informative and thoughtfully organized. I have several minor questions and comments aimed at improving clarity and completeness.

 

1. While the paper focuses on digital twins in battery storage systems, the terminology sometimes shifts to more general digital twin systems. It may help readers if the scope is more consistently defined whether limited to grid-scale BESS or also including EVs or residential systems.

2. Several international examples are cited (e.g., the Dutch 21.6 MWh project, TwinEU, DOE initiatives). Are all of these specific to battery storage applications, or are some broader digital twin efforts? A bit more context could clarify how directly they support your framework.

3. The proposed roadmap includes several policies and market interventions. Who is expected to lead or coordinate these efforts? Clarifying the primary responsible parties such as regulators, operators, OEMs could enhance the practical utility of the roadmap.

4. The discussion on cybersecurity is quite strong, particularly the alignment with IEC 62443 and NIS2. That said, are there twin-specific risks (e.g., bi-directional control loops, cloud dependency) that existing standards may not fully cover?

5. The final integrated governance framework model (Figure 7) is comprehensive. Have similar integrated approaches been adopted elsewhere (even partially)? If not, what markets or regions would be most conducive to piloting such a governance framework?

Author Response

Please see attached word file. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

no further comments