Integration of Mahalanobis-Taguchi System and Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing in a Production Environment

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

General Comments:

1. The abstract is not written appropriately. Abbreviations should be either avoided or clarified.

2. The whole introduction is not written appropriately. Two points have to be addressed: 1. Thesis statement must be inserted at the end of the introduction. 2. The focus must be on the motives behind conducting this research (with the support of references) rather than (for example) providing generic advantages of TDABC.

3. The remaining parts are acceptable (methods, the results/discussion, and the conclusion)

Editorial Comments:

1. In line 38, it is stated:
"...industrial industry." Either the word "industrial" or the word "industry" has to be paraphrased.

2. When using the numbered referencing styles, you have to avoid inserting the year of the publication within the text. Such formatting mistakes must be fixed. In particular, all these mistakes can be found in lines 33, 41, 46, 69, 78, 81, 83, 102, 107, 109, 125, 129, 138, 170, and 362.

3. In line 78 "...ABC..." ; do you mean "...Activity-Based Costing..." , please clarify because it wasn't mentioned before within the text.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper gives a substantial investigation of the integration of Mahalanobis-Taguchi system and time-driven activity-based costing in a production environment. The considered topic is interesting and useful. The theoretical derivation is rigorous, and the results appear correct and believable. The manuscript is generally well-written (although I gave a good number of corrections and suggestions) and provides an interesting conclusion. Nevertheless, the reviewer holds some concerns about this work which you can find below. I suggest that the authors revise and improve the manuscript accordingly.

1. The motivations for this work should be more precise.

2. There are extensive related works on similar studies. Please summarize the design difference and rationale compared with the existing works.

The following reference could help the readers and should be cited.

#R1. Feature Recognition and Selection Method of the Equipment State Based on Improved Mahalanobis-Taguchi System

#R2. Mahalanobis Taguchi System (MTS) and Mahalanobis Taguchi Gram-Schmidt (MTGS) methods as multivariate classification tools

#R3. Performance Analysis of a UAV-Assisted RF/FSO Relaying Systems for Internet of Vehicles

3. More results in a figure will increase the work's readability.

4. The reference format should be revised to adhere to journal guidelines.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx