博文
审稿意见求助
||||
2012年7月16号投了一篇文章在《Computer Journal》,9月6号返回审稿意见，一个审稿人的意见是大修，另外一个审稿人的意见是拒绝。 我根据审稿人的意见认真的修改，9月28号重新投搞到《Computer Journal》，12月2号返回审稿意见，对我的一个定理证明提出质疑，还要补充实验。12月9号提交修改稿，2013年1月10号返回审稿意见。一个审稿人同意接收发表，另外一个审稿人的意见还是大修。
审稿意见如下：
1. In the proof of Theorem 1, no on/off switching energy overhead is considered. However, in the Intel Xscale processor model used in the experiment part, there is switing energy overhead for powering down. When this energy overhead is considered, theorem 1 might not be true. This needs to be justified in the proof of theorem 1.
第一条审稿意见，审稿人说我没有考虑处理器开关后的开销，这样影响到定理的正确性。问题是我在功耗模型上已经提出了问题，并且做了假设处理器的静态功耗难以控制，并且漏电流功耗一直存在，我的做法是让处理器一直处于运行状态，不关闭处理器，在仿真实验的时候将这部分功耗已经加到了总功耗里面。我的做法和其他文献一样都是假设处理器一直处于运行状态。只有审稿人要求我补充实验的方法（另外一个文献提出的，和我使用的思想不一样）是需要关闭和打开处理器的。因为我意见假设处理器一直处于运行状态，如没有任务执行，将处于待机状态，而不是关机，所以不存在处理器关闭与打开的开销。
请问我将怎么更好的回答审稿人？
(1)
Despite its simplicity, this power model captures the essential components for the system-wide energy management. Here, is the static power, which includes the power to maintain basic circuits and keep the clock running and can be removed only by powering off the whole system. Due to the prohibitive overhead of turning off/on a system in periodic real-time execution settings, we assume that the system is in on state at all times and that always consumes and is not manageable. Different will not affect the absolute energy savings and, for simplicity, we will ignore the static power (i.e, ).
2. The authors declared in the response to Reviewer 2 that the algorithm DSRDP is based on the DAC'05 paper. But the author's explanation on DSRDP on Section 4 does not reflect that completely:
First, DAC'05 paer is not cited here and the author did not mention in the experiment section that DSRDP is based on DAC'05 paper, either. Second, even assuming DSRDP is based on DAC'05 paper, the authors' explanation on it in Section 4 is not consistent with the algorithm in DAC'05 paper. Note that the algorithm in DAC'05 is not simply based on improvement of DRA algorithm in [1], they are much different in terms of both slack time calculation and the way of reclaiming it. Moreover, it try to procrastinate the tasks not just when the processor is in idle status . They also use dynamic procrastination which can procrastinate the task even when the processor is not idle. The authors need to revise DARDP based on DAC'05 paper and show the actual improvement based on it.
审稿人提出需要将我的算法与DAC'05 paper的算法进行比较，由于我的疏忽，我只在introduction中引用文章，忘记在实验部分引用文章，还有我对DAC'05 paper算法的理解和审稿人的理解有偏差。经过认真的研究确实审稿人的意见是对的。但我在仿真实验按照DAC'05 paper算法的为代码写的算法是正确的，也就是说我写的代码是正确的，只是在表达算法上和审稿人存在不同。我重新做实验，实验的结果还是和原来的一样。出现这种情况如何回答审稿人？
由于本人第一次投搞经验不足，请各位大神提供宝贵的意见
https://m.sciencenet.cn/blog-827932-651955.html
上一篇：你身上有这种现象吗
下一篇：2013年规划
