All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
Thank you for considering the reviewers' comments and making the required changes to your article.
I am happy to inform you that your paper now reaches the required level for publication in PeerJ Computer Science. Thank you for considering our journal for publishing your research papers.
We hope you will continue to consider the journal for publication in your future research.
Sincerely,
M. Emilia Cambronero
Academic Editor of Peer J Computer Science
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Marieke Huisman, a 'PeerJ Computer Science' Section Editor covering this Section #]
Although I can't find the responsetoreviewer file, I think this version is acceptable because of the authors' lots of work.
no comment
no comment
Please, consider the comments of reviewer 1 to improve your paper so that it can be considered for publication in the journal PeerJ Computer Science journal.
[# PeerJ Staff Note: It is PeerJ policy that additional references suggested during the peer-review process should only be included if the authors are in agreement that they are relevant and useful #]
Nothing
Nothing
Nothing
As a reversion R1, this version is not satisfactory for solving the original problems.
1. The ontology-based data integrity mehtod with XML-based and OWL-based STEP has already in use for over a decade.
(please refer to: XOEM plus OWL-based STEP product information uniform description and implementation, Journal of Networks, v 6, n 12, p 1662-1667, 2011.)
2. I can't find about STEP-based feature modeler what the authors proposed in the abstact.
(About STEP semantic feature,please refer to : An improved NBA-based STEP design intention feature recognition,Future Generation Computer Systems, 2018,88(6):357-362. DOI: 10.1016/j.future.2018.05.033.)
3. As we know ,STEP AP242 contains PMI information, but I can't find any PMI information in the STEP AP242-based XML or OWL format in this manuscript.
(please refer to: QSCC: A Quaternion Semantic Cell Convolution Graph Neural Network for MBD Product Model Classification,IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics,2023,DOI: 10.1109/TII.2023.3246066.
This research has practical application value. It needs a lot of basic work, the workload is very large. I think it is acceptable before the authors can revise it carefully. Good lucky!
The authors met all my previous comments.
The authors met all my previous comments.
The authors met all my previous comments.
The authors met all my previous comments.
Please consider the reviewers' comments when resubmitting the paper. Thank you for considering PeerJ Computer Science to publish your research paper.
This paper aims to research STEP standard-based data integrity. The authors propose an interactive
and integrated framework for a cloud collaborative manufacturing system. The subject of the paper is interesting.However,regarding my review, I found that this paper is not innovative enough. What is the research question? Accordingly, what is the innovation and main contributions? In this paper,no specific algorithm is proposed for a certain type of data exchange. In a nutshell, the work is a simple extension of previous work and has very little technical merit. I think this paper is more like a technical report.
no comment
no comment
no comment
no comment
Introduction does not clearly talks about how the proposed approach is helping solving the problem space.It also does not talk about the STEP standard which is key of the paper.
Conclusions does not clarify on impact of the proposed approaches.
no comment
no comment
no comment
The discussion about the cloud manufacturing can be included not only cloud computing.
no comment
The article presents the solution using the STEP exchange file, for which consider it essential to increase the number of references with solutions based on the ISO10303 standard, as well as the information regarding the construction and implementation of the solution; to know if mapping tables, EXPRESS definitions, Application Interpreted Model (AIM) were used, important aspects indicated by the standard.
It is necessary to expand the information regarding integration, specifically in the "mapping layer" section, how integration is projected (CAD/CAPP/CAM/CAI) and the scope achieved for CAx formats. Differences in application protocols AP203, AP214, AP238, AP219 were considered ?.
Figure 2 can be complemented with a description of the features included in the design in relevant terms for CAx systems, such as (STEP-BASED FEATURE) or (Model-Based definition).
no comment
The research is novel and of significant impact on developing new solutions in the line of intelligent manufacturing. It presents a clear contribution that can be the basis for future work projected to overcome integration and interoperability barriers using neutral exchange files.
Excellent work!
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.