A Systematic Approach to Optimizing Energy-Efficient Automated Systems with Learning Models for Thermal Comfort Control in Indoor Spaces
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The following major revisions are proposed:
- The title needs to be a little more descriptive.
- The bibliographical references are considered sufficient
- In some cases, the temperature is in Celsius and in others in K, it would be necessary to unify the two.
- The Algorithms in Optimising the Energy Use of the Automated Thermal Comfort Systems for Ventilation should be more detailed.
- The conclusions are not as significant as the challenge of the article, they should be explained and detailed to a greater extent.
Author Response
Responses to Reviewer 1 – Major Revisions
The following major revisions are proposed:
Point 1: The title needs to be a little more descriptive.
Response 1: The title is revised regarding your comments.
Point 2: The bibliographical references are considered sufficient
Response 2: Many thanks for your comments. Regarding Reviewer 2’s comments, additional discussions are needed to be added to the Related Works section, and References are improved accordingly.
Point 3: In some cases, the temperature is in Celsius and in others in K, it would be necessary to unify the two.
Response 3: Kelvin is only used when the heat coefficients are taken into account in the calculations as the given parameter by the BIM software. Thus, only in the calculations via Equations (1) and (3), Celsius values were converted into Kelvin where necessary. Therefore, the necessary information is provided in the text about these calculations regarding your comments for these revisions. On the other hand, it is hard to convert all Celsius values into K since the values in the open-source datasets are also in Celsius.
Point 4: The Algorithms in Optimising the Energy Use of the Automated Thermal Comfort Systems for Ventilation should be more detailed.
Response 4: An introductory paragraph is added about the aim and significance of the method applied in this section. Moreover, explanatory sentences are added in this section to mention about the details and significance of the outcomes of the methods applied.
Point 5: The conclusions are not as significant as the challenge of the article, they should be explained and detailed to a greater extent.
Response 5: Explanatory sentences are added to the Conclusion section. Some sentences are also rewritten, and the outcomes of the research with its research proposals are emphasized further in this revision. The author hopes that your inquiries are considered and met properly.
In addition to your comments, the abstract is revised, and explanatory sentences are added for objectives, methodology, and major contributions of the research. Related Works and References sections are improved. Additional information is provided in the Materials and Methods, Experiments, and Discussions sections. Thus, all sections are improved, and the changed parts are edited for language corrections.
Please also find the revised parts in the tracking changes file attached with this submission.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In a context of global energy crisis, this article addresses an interesting and topical issue, relating user comfort and well-being to building design and energy savings through intelligent systems. However, there are some points that need to be complemented:
- The abstract does not help to understand the article. Please, the objective of the article, methodology and conclusions should be explained in a summarised way.
- The number of keywords is excessive, please review the instructions for authors.
- Point 1 is too long.
- Point 2 should be integrated into the wording of point 1. In addition, the objective of the research needs to be highlighted here.
- In the literature reference is made to building design and energy savings, but there is a lack of literature focusing on passive building design. Some possibilities are suggested:
Evaluation of environmental comfort in a social housing prototype with bioclimatic double-skin in a tropical climate. DOI: 10.1016/J.BUILDENV.2022.109119
The Ekihouse: an energy self-sufficient house based on passive design strategies. DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.03.077
Bioclimatic analysis in pre-design stage of passive house in Indonesia. DOI: 10.3390/buildings7010024
- This reviewer congratulates the authors for the methodological development.
- It would be advisable to describe what the "BIM simulations" consist of, which calculation engine is used?
The authors are congratulated for the research carried out.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Responses to Reviewer 2 – Major Revisions
In a context of global energy crisis, this article addresses an interesting and topical issue, relating user comfort and well-being to building design and energy savings through intelligent systems. However, there are some points that need to be complemented:
Point 1: The abstract does not help to understand the article. Please, the objective of the article, methodology and conclusions should be explained in a summarised way.
Response 1: The abstract is revised and rewritten according to your comments. Please consider that, to our knowledge, abstracts can be extended during the revisions to meet the required changes by the reviewers, and thus it is extended a bit to mention the necessary details in this revision.
Point 2: The number of keywords is excessive, please review the instructions for authors.
Response 2: Regarding your comments, “Internet of Things” is removed since it was not primarily concerned in this research. On the other hand, the author guidelines allow authors to use up to ten keywords. Thus, the keywords that may appeal to the readers’ attention are kept.
Point 3: Point 1 is too long. Point 2 should be integrated into the wording of point 1. In addition, the objective of the research needs to be highlighted here.
Response 3: Even though the author really struggles to understand what is meant by “Point 1” and “Point 2”, it is assumed that they are about the bullet points, which are highlighted in the Discussion section. Thus, necessary changes are made in the Introduction section regarding your comments as well as in the Discussion sections to highlight the major contributions and objectives of the research accordingly. These points are also briefly discussed in the abstract. The author hopes that your inquiries are considered and met properly.
Point 4: In the literature reference is made to building design and energy savings, but there is a lack of literature focusing on passive building design. Some possibilities are suggested:
Evaluation of environmental comfort in a social housing prototype with bioclimatic double-skin in a tropical climate. DOI: 10.1016/J.BUILDENV.2022.109119
The Ekihouse: an energy self-sufficient house based on passive design strategies. DOI:10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.03.077
Bioclimatic analysis in pre-design stage of passive house in Indonesia. DOI:10.3390/buildings7010024
Response 4: Many thanks for your suggestions. Mentioned articles are briefly discussed in the text, referring to the literature on passive building design with regard to your comments, and the articles are added to the References sections and cited in the text properly. Finally, the citations and references are carefully checked.
Point 5: This reviewer congratulates the authors for the methodological development.
It would be advisable to describe what the "BIM simulations" consist of, which calculation engine is used?
The authors are congratulated for the research carried out.
Response 5: Necessary information about BIM simulations is provided where necessary in the text with regard to your comments.
In addition, the title is revised, and additional information and corrections about the units, natural ventilation experiments, and optimization algorithms are provided in this revision. Moreover, Section 3.5 and the Conclusion sections are also revised and improved. Finally, language corrections are made throughout the whole text. Thus, the author hopes that the major revisions meet the expectations of the reviewers.
Please also find the revised parts in their exact places in the tracking changes file attached with this submission.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The article has been improved by the revisions made and I propose its publication.
