Content of review 1, reviewed on October 06, 2020
Comments on abstract,
the authors in the abstract have been answered the reason behind the research . however, the know how is not clearly stated in the abstract
Comments on title,
the title of the article is quite informative and indicates that the comparison is done with insertion a novel approach. however , it can be more attractive title for this recent subjects
Comments on references
the references are relevant to the main core of the article issue . some of them are not recent enough to the year of publishing , which is
Sellis T., Multiple-Query Optimization, ACM TODS, 13(1), 1988, pp. 23–52.
Comments on introduction/background
The Background in the Introduction is fairy enough , The goal of the paper is match the abstract but in the end of introduction the structured of paper is not mention.
Comments on methodology
Comments on Abstract, title and references: 1. The aim is clear and useful in used for information 2. The word Comparison in Title must be replase by word use 3. No reference to the genetic algorithm and the taboo algorithm
Comments on Introduction/background is clear
Comments on Methods: the process of subject selection clear the operation about genetic algorithm mutation and crossover must be draw as graph
Comments on Results: 1-figures relevant are clearly present 2-if the result have one table explain difference between the methods can be most clear
Comments on discussion and results: The discussion and results are clear and understandable The conclusions section in the study is very good on the subject of MQO , and the study is considered the basis for other future studies.
Specific comments on weaknesses of the article and what could be done to improve it: 1. Please about title:The word Comparison in Title must be replase by word use 2. Please mention reference to the genetic algorithm and the tabu algorithm 3. Please mention a table the explain difference between the methods can be most clear 4. the operation about genetic algorithm mutation and crossover must be draw as graph
Comments on data and results
there is no table in result explain difference between the methods
there is no example about actual data at least one example about MQO
Comments on discussion and conclusions
The discussion and results are clear and understandable The conclusions section in the study is very good on the subject of MQO , and the study is considered the basis for other future studies.
Source
© 2020 the Reviewer.
References
Z, K., T, M., B, B. 2000. Comparison of genetic and tabu search algorithms in multiquery optimization in advanced database systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science.