Review Reports
by
- Wenyue Tao 1,
- Chaoran Wu 2 and
- Fuyuan Chen 1,*
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Bharat Sarath Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. What is the main question addressed by the research?
The article addresses the problem of shaping the value of features related to trade in food products. The authors openly indicated three questions that constitute the research problem. These questions can be reduced to the main scientific problem of the article: How to predict product deliveries taking into account the assumed optimization criteria.
2. Do you consider the topic original or relevant in the field? Does it address a specific gap in the field?
In my opinion, the problem described in the article is important primarily in the practical context, as well as in the theory and practice of optimization.
3. What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
The approach proposed by the authors is a typical method used in this area. The results of the research conducted by the authors may constitute a source of knowledge for the optimization of product supply chains.
4. What specific improvements should the authors consider regarding the methodology? What further controls should be considered?
The authors used well-known and used methods, and the way they are used is correct. However, in order to improve the understanding of the content of the article, I propose to consider supplementing the article with the following aspects:
- a more detailed description of the input data, i.e. the source of this data, the scope selected for analysis,
- generalization of subsequent interpretations of analysis results, relating these results not only to the calculations performed, but also to the methods used.
5. Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented and do they address the main question posed?
The conclusions are consistent, clear and understandable. They refer to the general problems discussed in the article and explain the authors' intentions and achievements. However, I suggest considering supplementing this part of the article with conclusions resulting from the research conducted. I also propose to supplement this part of the article with a description of the possibilities of using the proposed methodology in a broader perspective.
6. Are the references appropriate?
The list of references is adequate to the research problem. The references to the bibliographic items are correct.
7. Please include any additional comments on the tables and figures.
The tables and figures included in the text are legible and transparent. Figures and tables are referenced in the text.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper is interesting and provides a method for tackling a very practical problem in the Chinese context. I think the numerical part is clear and convincing, However, the writing is not very grammatical and sometimes confusing. I think the authors need to clearly explain these points which I might have understood. As I see it
Q1 looks at the empirical distribution of products and categories
Q2 looks at optimal purchasing strategy (I was not sure if this is correct)
Q3 looks at profit maximizing strategy taking both sales price and costs into account.
I have rewritten the abstract and attached it here.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
The paper needs editing. I have rewritten the abstract. Please get a copy editor or at least apply a grammar checker to the document.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors address the important problem of order and inventory management of perishable products. A few suggestions for improving the manuscript.
1. The relationship between the three issues addressed in the study is poorly shown. I suggest that this linkage should be clearly shown.
2. Concretize and strengthen the presentation of the scientific contribution of the study. I propose summarizing the findings in the form of a methodology. It makes sense to present such a methodology before describing the structure and composition of the raw data.
3. The conclusion practically duplicates the abstract. I suggest presenting in the Conclusion the summarized results and scientific contribution of the study. Show also future research.
4. The literature review clearly needs to be expanded. Expand the literature review with an analysis of research in the field of inventory optimization.
5. Specify the experimental setup. What software was used for the calculations?
6. Explain the meaning of i (line 117) and Ni (line 151).
7. Figures 7 and 8 are uninformative and unclear. Add explanations for: A, B, green arrows, yellow arrows, dashed arrows in Figure 7. Add a detailed explanation of the flow diagram in Figure 8.
8. Increase the size of the lettering in Figure 6.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors provided convincing responses to my comments and significantly improved the manuscript according to my suggestions.