A Survey on Computational Intelligence Applications in Distribution Network Optimization
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments on “A Survey on Computational Intelligence applications in Distribution Network Optimization”
Minor comments:
Keywords. Please expand list / please improve - Authors should make better use of this section to allow the article to be found on search engines.
Please add the List of Nomenclature/abbreviation. It should be given at the end of the article (before References, see Electronics journal template). Please use alphabetical order. Please add units.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In this paper, a survey on computational intelligence applications in distribution network optimization is carried out. The content in the manuscript is well written, and the structure of the paper is fine. However, the authors need to clearly emphasize their key points as they conclude the related works. Accordingly, the following issues should be addressed before the final decision.
- While the paper focuses on optimal DG allocation and sizing in the distribution network, why have the authors not included it in the title?
- The authors should clarify and summarize the novel features, the main contributions, and the added value of the review conducted compared to other relevant surveys presented in the literature. The following papers are good examples: “10.1109/TSG.2017.2720471”, “A Review on Optimal Allocation and Sizing Techniques for DG in Distribution Systems”.
- There are too many texts and detailed descriptions in Section 4 of the paper, making it hard to follow a review paper as it is supposed to be. The use of tables/figures focusing on their advantages/disadvantages and applications would give the readers a better overview of the existing methods than providing general information! Moreover, regarding each method/model, a general mathematical representation/flowchart/pseudocode/block diagram is needed to support the text. It will also help readers better map the theory into practice and distinguish the differences among existing models.
- In the literature review, some important issues like uncertainty, dynamic programming method, hybrid renewable energy systems were not considered. Accordingly, the authors are invited to update the paper and refer to references such as “10.3390/en12173369”, “10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.089”, “10.1016/j.ijepes.2015.07.029”, and “1016/j.epsr.2020.106483”.
- A table for comparing the main contents of the references, at least among the selected ones, is needed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have addressed my comments. So, the paper is accepted.
Author Response
Thank you very much. Your help is truly appreciated.
Authors.
