Vehicle-to-Everything-Car Edge Cloud Management with Development, Security, and Operations Automation Framework
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
manuscript presents the Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) Car Edge Cloud framework, a cloud-native architecture driven by development, security, and operations (DevSecOps) principles, designed to address the challenges of managing distributed edge environments for V2X applications. The manuscript's issues complement the knowledge on the exchange of information between vehicles and the environment, which is particularly important for autonomous mobility. The work is significant and important, although it requires some additions and explanations.
Detailed comments on the manuscript:
1. I think that the phrase "V2X-Car Edge Cloud" does not need to be bolded.
2. The abstract and keywords are fine.
3. In line 26 you can add more references, for example: [https://doi.org/10.3390/en14164777
https://doi.org /10.2478/logi-2021-0021].
4. The main contributions of this article are clearly defined and divided into areas.
5. Section two clearly introduces the manuscript's problems, divided into subsequent research areas, which is good.
6. Section 3 should start with a short introduction and not with a figure. I suggest moving the figure a few lines down to 184.
7. Figure 2. please move to line 276.
8. Figure 3. please move to line 350.
9. Figure 4. please move to line 370.
10. Figure 5. please move to line 450.
11. Figure 6. please move to line 474.
12. Figure 7. please move to line 489.
13. Figure 8. please move to line 504.
14. Figure 9. please move to line 528.
15. Figure 10. please move to line 638.
16. Figure 11. please move to line 665.
17. Table 2., please move to line 678.
18. Table 3., please move to line 689.
19. Figure 12. please move to line 693.
20. Figure 13. please move to line 705.
21. Figure 14. please move to line 730.
22. Figure 15. please move to line 756.
23. Figure 16. please move to line 775.
24. Figure 17. please move to line 795.
25. Figure 18. please move to line 807.
26. Figure 19. please move to line 829.
27. Figure 20 and 21. please move to line 845.
28. Figure 21 is poorly legible, the captions on the individual circles are imprecise and can be misleading, please correct this.
29. The tables should be adapted to the journal's template.
30. In sections 6 and 7 you can add elements of discussion with other works or projects, this will strengthen the level of the work and highlight its scientific value.
31. The conclusions in section 8 are correct.
To sum up, the manuscript is good, it requires some editing corrections and additions in the discussion section, but overall it has good scientific value. Therefore, I think that the work is worth publishing after corrections and additions in the journal Electronics.
Thank you!
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article presents an innovative and relevant proposal for integrating DevSecOps principles into an edge-cloud management framework for V2X systems. However, improvements need to be implemented as well as answers to some questions, namely:
1 - The introduction should better explore the comparison between the proposed framework and other existing solutions in the literature. Or create a section for this purpose.
2 - Although the use of simulations is suitable for a proof of concept, in my opinion there is a lack of tests in real scenarios or more diverse data. What do the authors think about this?
3 - The results lack additional metrics to measure the system's performance in terms of scalability, latency and security in extreme conditions.
4 - Some figures are overly complex, such as Figure 4. Simplifying or segmenting these diagrams would be beneficial.
5 - The conclusions lack information about the limitations of the work, such as the dependence on simulations, and future work on the same.
6 - Authors should improve the overall English in the article.
7 - I think it would be interesting to add a section to the article that indicates the potential practical and industrial implications of the work developed in future intelligent transportation systems.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe English could be improved to more clearly express the research.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPaper presents a forward-thinking approach to managing V2X systems, laying a solid foundation for future smart city deployments.
While the Software-in-the-Loop Simulation (SiLS) is comprehensive, it lacks sufficient real-world testing. Simulations may not fully replicate the unpredictability of real-world traffic or environmental conditions, which could impact performance in actual deployments.
Inclusion of XAI is a strength, the explanation of its integration into decision-making is somewhat abstract. There’s no detailed discussion of specific XAI techniques used to achieve transparency in AI-driven decisions or their limitations.
Although latency and detection accuracy are mentioned, the paper lacks a comparative analysis with other existing frameworks. It’s unclear how the system outperforms comparable systems. The paper doesn't sufficiently address how the framework performs under high traffic or heavy data loads, which are common in urban V2X environments. While a specific emergency scenario is tested, the framework might not generalize well to other edge cases (examples).
ToDo's:
Include a comparison with existing V2X solutions to benchmark performance.
Offer a deeper explanation of XAI integration and its limitations to provide transparency and trustworthiness.
Nice to have:
Discuss potential automation or training tools for easier deployment and management of Kubernetes clusters.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
thank you for your satisfactory responses to the review comments and for improving the manuscript. I accept the changes and recommend the work for publication.
Thank you!
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 1,
Thank you sincerely for your thoughtful review and for granting approval for the publication of our manuscript. Wishing you a new year filled with happiness and success.
Thank you!
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article presents an innovative framework for management in V2X environments using edge cloud and DevSecOps principles. The work is well structured and relevant after the reviews, for intelligent transportation systems. However, some improvements are recommended:
1 - In the introduction, authors must include the distinguishing element of the work they present.
2 - The results presented do not require additional metrics on scalability, latency and security under extreme conditions, and should address these aspects in the future work section.
3 - The conclusions should highlight the limitations of the study and the next steps, such as adaptation to different hardware infrastructures.
4 - Information on practical and industrial applications must be included in the article.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe English could be improved to more clearly express the research.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
