A Semantic Framework for Decision Making in Forest Fire Emergencies
, Spyridon Kintzios 1, Zoe Vasileiou 1, Georgios Meditskos 1,2, Stefanos Vrochidis 1 and Ioannis Kompatsiaris 1Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1)This paper mainly investigates the semantic framework for decision marking. As mentioned that if the authors provide the abbreviation of some noun, this abbreviation should be used in the following part. Hence, the authors should provide the full name of ONTO-SAFF.
2)How to understand the semantic framework in forest fire emergencies?
3)The contributions and motivations of the paper should be clarified for decision making in forest free emergencies.
1)This paper mainly investigates the semantic framework for decision marking. As mentioned that if the authors provide the abbreviation of some noun, this abbreviation should be used in the following part. Hence, the authors should provide the full name of ONTO-SAFF.
2)How to understand the semantic framework in forest fire emergencies?
3)The contributions and motivations of the paper should be clarified for decision making in forest free emergencies.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This manuscript explains that during forest fire emergencies, a large amount of data becomes available, and the challenge is to efficiently manage and integrate this data to extract useful insights and knowledge to facilitate advanced decision-making. The paper presents ONTO-SAFE, an ontology-based framework that adopts Semantic Web technologies for data integration and infusion of domain and background knowledge. The findings of this study may offer valuable insights to decision-making in real operational scenarios.
To further improve the manuscript, some problems need to be carefully solved.
1.It would be better to providing more details about the specific data sources used in the framework.
2. It would be better to discuss the limitations and challenges of implementing the proposed framework, such as scalability issues, data quality concerns, and potential biases in decision-making. This would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the practical implications and potential areas for future research.
3.Can the authors discuuss the integration of real-time data streams and advanced analytics techniques, such as machine learning algorithms, to enhance the accuracy and timeliness of decision support in forest fire emergencies? This would further enhance the capabilities of the framework and its ability to handle dynamic and evolving situations.
4.Considering the ethical and privacy implications of using data from various sources, particularly when sharing information with citizens and professionals. It would be better to discuss some measures taken to ensure data privacy and security would strengthen the framework's credibility and address potential concerns.
The language in this manuscript can be improved.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
-The paper presents an ontology-based framework for decision making in forest fire emergencies called ONTO-SAFE. The framework uses data from different types of sources.
-Interesting and relevant paper that could support practical applications related to forest fire emergencies.
-In the second sentence of the Abstract it is mentioned a "crisis", it is not clear to which crisis the authors are referring to, is it the COVID-19 pandemic, a forest fire or something else?
-In Line 450, it should be "are good to be known..." instead of "is good to be known...".
-The sentence that starts in Line 483 is a bit difficult to understand in its current form, I suggest to re-write it to make it clearer to the reader.
-In Line 602, the sentence is not clear, should the word "implement" would be "imply" instead?
-The technical aspects of the research presented seem sound and detailed.
-Regarding the writing style and typos in the paper, I would suggest that the authors double check the paper to ensure that there are no typos or misspellings.
-In Line 450, it should be "are good to be known..." instead of "is good to be known...".
-The sentence that starts in Line 483 is a bit difficult to understand in its current form, I suggest to re-write it to make it clearer to the reader.
-In Line 602, the sentence is not clear, should the word "implement" would be "imply" instead?
-Regarding the writing style and typos in the paper, I would suggest that the authors double check the paper to ensure that there are no typos or misspellings.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
This paper proposes an ontology-based framework for wildfire events, incorporating Semantic Web technologies to integrate data, and to infuse domain and background knowledge. First of all, the criteria that thresholds are chosen in Table 2 need to be explained. Are they chosen from a statistical analysis? Can the thresholds be valid across different seasons of the year? Can they be applied to different geographical areas? The authors should explain in more detail about the accuracy of the decision-making from the proposed system in addition to the response time. Also if possible, the accuracy may be compared against other methods from the literature. Reference items were not ordered numerically. Also, when citing, you used [1], and ontology1 interchangeably. Please be consistent.
Please rewrite lines 283-286 on page 7. The meanings of these sentences are not clear to understand.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
The manuscript has been significantly improved and can be accepted in present form.
