A Real-Time Pre-Response Experiment System for High-Rise Building Fires Based on the Internet of Things

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I would like to begin the review of this article by encouraging the authors to revise the structure and organization. The article, rather than resembling a scientific paper, appears more like a technical report that has been translated. A scientific article typically follows a specific format, including an introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Furthermore, it should demonstrate a clear research question or objective, provide a thorough literature review, present well-designed experiments or studies, and draw valid conclusions based on the findings. I suggest the authors consider these elements and make the necessary adjustments to ensure the article aligns with the standards of a scientific publication.

The English proficiency level of the text is intermediate. It contains grammatical errors, lack of clarity, and could benefit from improved coherence.

I want to do  three suggested improvements:

Clarify and simplify sentence structure: The text contains long and convoluted sentences that make it challenging to follow the main points. Breaking down complex sentences into shorter, more straightforward ones would enhance readability.

Provide clear topic sentences: Each paragraph should have a clear topic sentence that introduces the main idea. This helps the reader understand the purpose of the paragraph and improves the overall organization of the text.

Review and revise technical terminology: Some technical terms and phrases may not be used correctly or are not adequately explained. Ensuring accurate usage and providing explanations or definitions for specialized terms would improve clarity and understanding.

The excessive use of Asian references in a field with a wide range of literature in the last 30 years is a demonstration of little interest in research development.

滥用亚洲参考文献在一个拥有广泛文献资料的领域中，在过去30年中显示出对研究发展的兴趣不高。 (Làn yòng Yàzhōu cānkǎo wénxiàn zài yīgè yǒngyǒu guǎngfàn wénliàn zīliào de lǐngyù zhōng, zài guòqù 30 nián zhōng xiǎnshì chū duì yánjiū fāzhǎn de xìngqù bùgāo.)

The images need to be improved as they are of low quality. There is an excess of images, as seen in figures 13-15, which overwhelm the information without breaking it down and summarizing it. In a scientific article, the focus should be on analysis rather than bombarding the reader with unnecessary graphs and images that do not contribute anything meaningful.

As editor in this highly prestigious scientific journal, I have several concerns regarding the conclusions drawn from this study. Firstly, while the idea of a real-time pre-response system for high-rise fires seems promising, the study lacks a comprehensive evaluation of the system's performance in real-life scenarios. The effectiveness and reliability of the system should be rigorously tested and validated through field experiments or simulations involving different fire scenarios.

 

Secondly, the authors should provide a more detailed analysis of the system's capabilities in terms of fire detection and prediction. What are the specific sensors used, and how do they contribute to the accuracy and timeliness of fire detection? How is the prediction algorithm developed and validated? These aspects need to be thoroughly explained to assess the system's true potential.

 

Furthermore, the authors mention the system's ability to dynamically adjust the water mist device based on the fire situation. However, the criteria and algorithms employed for this adjustment are not elucidated. It is essential to provide a clear description of the decision-making process and how it ensures optimal fire suppression without causing unintended consequences.

 

Moreover, while the study briefly mentions functions such as real-time detection, remote visualization analysis, independent power supply, and bidirectional control, further elaboration is necessary. How does the remote visualization analysis contribute to situational awareness? How is the independent power supply ensured in critical scenarios? These details are crucial for assessing the system's reliability and practicality.

 

Lastly, the authors claim that the developed system improves the problem of unclear fire conditions during high-rise fires and provides important reference information for rescue and firefighting. However, no specific evidence or case studies are presented to support this assertion. The authors should consider including practical examples or scenarios where the system's contributions were demonstrated, showcasing its true value in real-world firefighting operations.

 

 

In conclusion, while the concept of a real-time pre-response system for high-rise building fires based on IoT is intriguing, this study lacks the necessary depth and substantiation to make significant contributions to the field. Further validation through rigorous experiments, detailed analyses of system capabilities, and evidence from practical implementations are needed to establish the system's effectiveness, reliability, and real-world applicability.

 

The English proficiency level of the text is intermediate. It contains grammatical errors, lack of clarity, and could benefit from improved coherence. 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper developed a real-time pre-response system for high-rise building fires based on the Internet of Things. The system can quickly detect and predict fires, and prespray water mist on the fire and smoke transmission path to prevent the spread of fire and smoke. In addition, the system can dynamically adjust the switch and working intensity of the fine water mist device in real-time based on the fire situation, effectively extinguishing the fire and preventing it from reigniting. The system also has functions such as real-time detection, remote visualization analysis, independent power supply, and bidirectional control.

the paper is well structured and the idea is original and interesting. I recommend acceptance of this paper

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper presents an IoT real-time response system for detecting and controlling fires in high-rise buildings. The work includes both simulation results as well as a physical prototype. The proposal is interesting and simulation results seem to be close of what is expected and correlates to the experimental results.

I don't have comments on the simulation/experimental methodologies and results as they make sense based on the results presented by the authors. I only have few comments on minor typos and/or missing information:

- On line 201, reference is to Table 4 rather than Table 1.

- Figure 6 has a typo in temperature

- Table 2 has typos

- Figure 9 was never referenced in the text

- In Table 3 title, should be Froude's instead of Freud's

- Missing table number in line 496

Minor typos. No further comments in the quality of English language

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I aacept the publucation of the paper.