Communication Bandwidth Prediction Technology for Smart Power Distribution Business in Smart Parks

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors should add a section with the description of similar works.
The authors should compare their methodology with some similar works.
The authors should better explain why the proposed methodology seems to work well and mention the limitations of their study in the conclusion.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript (electronics-1470400), communication bandwidth prediction technology for smart power distribution business in smart parks, shows quite interesting results of the communication bandwidth in various applications. Authors presented quite comprehensive analysis electrically. One minor comment this referee would like to provide here to authors is that - It would be quite useful if authors can provide the axis units for all the plots (e.g., the a.u or %) to make it clear for this referee and potential readers. 

Due to the above comment, this referee would like to put the manuscript status as "Minor Revision" in the current phase.  

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments
1. Regarding Fig. 4, the numbers in the axes do not look clear.
2. Regarding Fig. 5, the numbers in the axes do not look clear.
3. Regarding Fig. 6, the numbers in the axes do not look clear.
4. In 'Step 1: Obtain the introductory rate of arrival of various service periodic services and 255 sudden service packets~', the introductory can be changed to 'initial'?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper is well written and easy to follow. However, the following improvements are suggested before the paper is Accepted. 

1) Please specify key contributions of the paper in the Introduction Section. 

2) Supply a summary of the organization of the paper at the end of the Introduction.

3) Commentary about the "Related Works" is not sufficient. Please cite some more recent related works and discuss how this work is different from the existing ones.

4) Support the Conclusion section with the key results and research insights.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

Traffic modelling based on the queuing theory is a classical problem. There are also many papers on modelling periodic network traffic. Thus, the contribution of this paper is not clear.

The authors are just explaining their method in the paper, but they should refer to more papers, briefly introduce existing methods, and compare their method to existing ones.

I don't see much point in focusing the research on smart parks.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

A final proof reading is needed.

Reviewer 4 Report

The comments are addressed and the paper is improved. Hence, my decision is to Accept the paper in the current form. 

Reviewer 5 Report

My review comments were adequately addressed.