Next Article in Journal
Advances in the Manufacturing Process of Space Maintainers in Pediatric Dentistry: A Systematic Review from Traditional Methods to 3D-Printing
Next Article in Special Issue
Modelling and Control Methods in Path Tracking Control for Autonomous Agricultural Vehicles: A Review of State of the Art and Challenges
Previous Article in Journal
Optimum Driving of Ultrasonic Cleaner Using Impedance and FFT Analysis with Validation of Image Processing of Perforated Foils
Previous Article in Special Issue
Current Situation and Future Development Direction of Soil Covering and Compacting Technology under Precision Seeding Conditions in China
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

A Review of Posture Detection Methods for Pigs Using Deep Learning

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(12), 6997; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13126997
by Zhe Chen 1,2,3, Jisheng Lu 1,2,3 and Haiyan Wang 1,2,3,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(12), 6997; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13126997
Submission received: 27 April 2023 / Revised: 31 May 2023 / Accepted: 6 June 2023 / Published: 9 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Review Papers in Agricultural Science and Technology)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript focuses posture detection methods of pigs with deep learning. Firstly, the review introduces the techniques of posture detection methods and its important. Secondly, a series of Data acquisition algorithms and their connection with deep learning are discussed. Lastly, the authors summarize the application of deep learning methods to pig posture detection. Overall, the content of this review is informative but the manuscript still needs some improvement before acceptance for publication. My detailed comments are as follows:

1.      Improve the introduction part by making it more concise, concise introduction can help the reader to comprehend the whole review quickly.

2.      The authors should provide more details on how newcomers in the field, such as research students, can utilize the current methods for new cases.

3.      If possible, suggesting possible future research directions can be helpful. The authors can add in section 5, more details and specific suggestions are encouraged the readers. 

4.      More discussion on the current limitations of deep learning methods can be helpful. Maybe a table that summarizes them with their main properties - is not a must, just a recommendation..

5.      The quality of English needs improving.

6.      The author should supplement the literature on 2023 and need to add more works that are relevant some are : Deep learning and machine vision approaches for posture detection of individual pigs, Novel Cuckoo Search-Based Metaheuristic Approach for Deep Learning Prediction of Depression, A review on nature-inspired algorithms for cancer disease prediction and classification, Modified Genetic Algorithm with Deep Learning for Fraud Transactions of Ethereum Smart Contract, Computer vision model with novel cuckoo search based deep learning approach for classification of fish image, A machine learning based approach to detect the Ethereum fraud transactions with limited attributes, Automatically detecting pig position and posture by 2D camera imaging and deep learning.

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript. We sincerely appreciate your valuable feedback and suggestions. After carefully considering your comments, we have made the necessary revisions to address each point raised.

In the attachment, you will find our responses to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The abstract provided in this submission highlights the limitations and challenges in the current research on pig posture detection using AI. However, the article lacks a clear description of the research methods used and criteria for selecting articles cited in the discussion. This may make it difficult for readers to evaluate the validity and reliability of the arguments presented.

Furthermore, the authors did not provide a clear time frame for the studies cited in the discussion section, which can make it difficult for readers to assess the relevance and currency of the research presented. Additionally, while the authors have identified several limitations in the current research, they have not provided concrete suggestions for how to address these limitations or improve upon existing methods.

To improve the quality of this submission, the authors should consider providing more details on the research methods used and criteria for selecting articles. They should also provide a clear time frame for the studies cited in the discussion section. Additionally, the authors should consider providing specific recommendations for how to address the limitations and challenges identified, such as suggesting new research methods, proposing new datasets, or recommending new algorithms. By doing so, the authors can help readers better understand the state of the field and provide a foundation for future research.

Overall, the submission has potential, but further improvement is necessary to make the research more valuable and accessible to the reader.

Author Response

Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript. We sincerely appreciate your valuable feedback and suggestions. After carefully considering your comments, we have made the necessary revisions to address each point raised.

In the attachment, you will find our responses to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper discussed pigs' posture, which reflects their psychological status. The paper is organized well and discusses the issue from various points, but it does not have any graph or picture to illustrate the concepts and methods used in each approach. The authors summarized various approaches in tables but did not mention or discuss each method's strong and weak points. 

Some abbreviations need clarification. what is the future of using deep learning in pig posture detection?

some images need to be added to make the paper more readable.

 

Author Response

Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript. We sincerely appreciate your valuable feedback and suggestions. After carefully considering your comments, we have made the necessary revisions to address each point raised.

In the attachment, you will find our responses to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors revisioned the manuscript.

Back to TopTop