Dear Prof. Kim,
I am writing to you concerning the above referenced manuscript, which you submitted to the IEEE Internet of Things Journal.
Although it has merit, based on the enclosed set of reviews this manuscript has been rejected for publication in the IEEE Internet of Things Journal.
You may wish to consider the comments of the reviewers and submit it to another journal.
If you have any questions regarding the reviews, please contact the Associate Editor: Dr. Sandra Cespedes email@example.com. Any other inquiries should be directed to the Administrative Assistant: Mariola Piatkiewicz firstname.lastname@example.org
Thank you for considering IEEE Internet of Things Journal for publication of your work.
Prof. Sherman Shen
Editor-in-Chief, IEEE Internet of Things Journal
• Associate Editor Comments, if any, are listed below:
Associate Editor: Cespedes, Sandra
Comments to Author:
The reviewers both consider that the main topic developed in this work, i.e., the design of a routing protocol customized for restricted nodes, is not fully related to the IoT topic but more to general wireless sensor networks. Furthermore, it seems the protocol is suitable only for specific LoWPAN technologies, but this is not clearly stated by the authors. I would suggest the authors better highlight the novelty of their work when submitting to an appropriate journal
• Reviewer Comments, if any, are listed below:
Comments to the Author
This paper proposes a new routing algorithm for Internet of Things. In the peocess of selecting the next hop of a packet, both energy balance and time deday are taken into consideration. Quite a few related approaches have been proposed in the field of wireless sensor networks, ad hoc networks and mesh networks. The contributions of the proposed algorithm are not apparent.
1. The presentation and organization of this paper can be improved.
2. Section IV introduces the OEPED algorithm. However, this algorithm is some optional and lacks technique depth.
3. All the figures in this paper are informal which can be carefully designed.
In conclusion, this paper should be greatly improved before resubmission.
Comments to the Author
The paper propose a routing protocol for iot node that takes into account energy , flow rate, and delay of Industrial IoT nodes.
The topic of the paper is important for the reader of this journal, but its relevance may be limited to the IoT node with reduced available power.
Looking at the assumptions made in network model, there are several hard limitations. Probably only few kinds of wireless sensors in industry can match them.
The authors should carefully verify if this is the case, and , they should mention it since the beginning.
IEEE802.15.4a comes out of the blue in section IV. Is the proposed solution only applicable to IEEE802.15.4a? please state this important point from the beginning.
As a matter of fact the paper seem more oriented to wireless sensor network than IoT.
If this is not the aim of the authors, please provide better justification and more links to the - industrial - internet - of - things.
Fig. 5 is not referenced in the text.
The number of simulation run is not specified. What is the confidence of your simulation model? You run the simulations just once?
Why did you mention "loopholes" in the abstract?
The "related study" section must be carefully proofread because some sentences are obscure
variable w, n, and k are not defined (equations 4 and 5)
Ei and Eij are not defined in equations 7 and 8
G is used both in eq 6 and in eq 12 with different meaning.
Praph quality can be improved. Resolution is quite low.
Note: If any of the reviews include an additional attached file, it will not be attached to this message. To access it, log in your Author Center and click on "Decision (View Letter)" -- this brings up this message, and at the bottom is the attached file. Click on that file name and you can see the attached comments from reviewers.