I think you need to list what are the contributions of this work more explicitly. Given that an existing paper  by the authors already describes the WHLK model. Also, you mention in your abstract that your algorithm is more reliable and efficient but the paper does not have any comparison or experiments with related work.
In the second paragraph of the Introduction chapter, the authors write that "the amount of financial loss caused by software piracy in 2011 was more than 63,456 million U.S. dollars" and refer to a Business Software Alliance (BSA) study.
While the pure figure is correctly cited, the statement itself is absolutely false (although commonly spread).
The BSA study only calculates the "Commercial Value of Unlicensed Software" to this amount. Equalizing this absolutely virtual and meaningless figure of a "commercial value" with the real amount of finacial loss presumes that every illegal license would be legalized. It is common sense that this would most probably never happen (not even nearly) and evidence for that can be found in the BSA study itself.
Furthermore, the BSA is a lobby organization, which should be mentioned explicitely if it is absolutely necessary to cite it in a scientific article. However, it would be highly desireable to have a scientifically sound figure cited here instead of the lobby interest driven figure of the BSA. The authors should have a look at: Leung, Tin Cheuk. "What Is the True Loss Due to Piracy? Evidence from Microsoft Office in Hong Kong." Review of Economics and Statistics 95.3 (2013): 1018-1029.
You can also choose to receive updates via daily or weekly email digests. If you are following multiple preprints then we will send you no more than one email per day or week based on your preferences.
Note: You are now also subscribed to the subject areas of this preprint and will receive updates in the daily or weekly email digests if turned on. You can add specific subject areas through your profile settings.
Usage since published - updated daily