Oct 7, 2023
This reviewer finds the theme and subject of this work to be of great interest and relevance to the Journal "Engineering Research Express". However, before proceeding to the next stage of acceptance some changes and modifications are needed. The recommendation status is "Major revision required before acceptance"
=========================================================
In this reviewer's opinion, is missing in this experimental research work:
- a custom purpose-made hardware electronics (as opposed to using off-the-shelf PCB modules (not mandatory, but highly recommended) with its own dedicated section on the document.
- a description of the hardware electronics specifications
- a description of how a dataset is handled and stored. Is it on the proposed hardware electronics? Is it Cloud-based, for instance using an HTTP API for data exchange? A subsection is needed to describe this topic of "data storage and handling". (mandatory)
- This kind of technology handles sensitivity data, meaning data that can be put to criminal or even worst kinds of activities. This should be presented and briefly discussed in its own section on this research document. This reviewer suggests the inclusion of the topic "open data" and its advantages as a safer way to handle this kind of sensitive data. (mandatory)
- A link to an experimental data repository. For instance a dataverse, Figshare, dryad, or any other. Where experimental data can be evaluated by a reviewer. (not mandatory, but highly recommended)
- A link to a repository where the firmware code used can be evaluated by a reviewer. For instance on GitHub. (not mandatory, but highly recommended) Also, this reviewer highly recommends the inclusion of a pseudo-algorithm in the corresponding section of the document.
- All acronyms used throughout the research document must first be presented and briefly explained. For instance, LVQ, GLVQ, GMLVQ, PIR, and all others are used.
- Where needed, is missing proper references of figures and tables on the text that is describing them. For instance, section 4.2 is missing a reference to Table 3 next to "...lead to overfitting".
- "Table 5 - Comparison between different algorithms" must include an introductory paragraph to describe each algorithm presented in Table 5 and include all hyperparameters for each that led to results shown in Table 5.
- Due to the current status and evaluation proposed, this reviewer did not do ...
- ...manual verification of the references listed.
- ...extensive grammar or text error checking. However, on successive reads of the document, it was possible to identify a few errors (marked in red on the revised document sent) that need attention and correction. For instance in the legend of Figure 3, "movement of codebooks" needs correction as a codebook does not have the ability to move from one place to another. Only humans. In Figure 2 the "REC" legend is inadequate and should be replaced by, for instance, a datalogger or other that better describes the hardware electronics and its function.
- mathematical formulation looks solid, however, this reviewer did not do an extensive verification.
This and all the above will change on future resubmissions and re-revisions of the document. When all identified tasks above are addressed. And added. In particular, those marked as "mandatory".
===============================================================