Skip to Content
MDPIMDPI

Advanced

by
  • Pei Zhou 1,*,
  • Songjie Wang 1 and
  • Xiaoping Liu 1
  • et al.

Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Anonymous Reviewer 3: Anonymous

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

  1. The selection of TRNSYS and CONTAM should be justified by literature about its accuracy and validation against experimental work.
  2. The Figure 14-18 should be large enough for reading clarity.
  3. Cost benefit analysis of proposed system should be discussed.
  4. The TRNSYS simulation of 7 days (1-7 July) is not justified. It should be seasonal or annual?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

  • Authors names and affiliations are missing
  • The abstract is very short
  • Please do not use unexplained abbreviations in the abstract (e.g. SVR)
  • The entire text is full of unexplained abbreviations
  • Line 143: is the VAV a Variable refrigerant flow (VRF) system? Please consider this publication for common terms https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/9/1253
  • Line 364: MSE?
  • Conclusions: please do not use abbreviations here
  • Author contributions and funding are missing

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

It is an interesting work on a relevant topic. However, I would like to draw attention to some minor points below:

Abstract

Only use abbreviations if they were used in the abstract - remove (WSN). With regard to other abbreviations, write in full the first time they appear. Note that the article may be read by researchers who are not experts in the field.

Keywords

WSN is too vague. More specific terms such as “indoor temperature control” would better represent the content of the work.

Introduction

Line 118 – “Other two conventional control methods have been studied for comparison.” – Inform the name of the methods.

Conclusion

The authors should better highlight the relevance of the results.

In addition, the authors need to create a section called Discussion, in which they could synthesize important conclusions that were distributed throughout the text. There is need to properly situate your findings in the context of the findings of other researchers using relevant references.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Melioration advices have been well implemented.