|
|
In view of the criticisms of the reviewer(s) found at the bottom of this letter, your manuscript has not been recommended for publication in IEEE Access. Unfortunately, we will not accept resubmissions of this article.
Thank you for considering IEEE Access for the publication of your research.
Sincerely,
Prof. Sangsoon Lim
Associate Editor, IEEE Access
lssgood80@gmail.com
Reviewers' Comments to Author:
Reviewer: 1
Recommendation: Accept (minor edits)
Comments:
Comments;
1. It is not clear whether the SMOTE oversampling is applied before partition into training, validation and testing sets.
2. Please check the definition of n_estimators for lighGBM.
Additional Questions:
1) Does the paper contribute to the body of knowledge?: Yes
2) Is the paper technically sound?: Yes
3) Is the subject matter presented in a comprehensive manner?: Yes
4) Are the references provided applicable and sufficient?: Yes
5) Are there references that are not appropriate for the topic being discussed?: No
5a) If yes, then please indicate which references should be removed.:
Reviewer: 2
Recommendation: Reject (do not encourage resubmit)
Comments:
In this research article, the authors claims to proposed an improved LightGBM model to predict coronary heart disease. The authors have provided a literature review with references. The authors have provided a table of different state-of-art methods in Table#1 page#2, in which the information about the performance evaluation of the mentioned published methods is missing. In methodology section, dataset is highly imbalanced. It will be an interesting experiment to apply some data balancing techniques and train the model using balanced data.
Overall quality of English needs improvement, such as Avoid using I/we/my/our words.
Equation 3-11 too basic
The quality of figure 4 and figure 6 is not appealing. Moreover, authors are recommended to increase text size in these figures.
Results and Discussion section can be improved. Further, only the results are presented without any substantial discussion. It will be better to conduct a study that shows the comparison of recently published work and the proposed work in the result section
Figure 2 is basic
Additional Questions:
1) Does the paper contribute to the body of knowledge?: To some extend
2) Is the paper technically sound?: Paper is a good start however lacks technically
3) Is the subject matter presented in a comprehensive manner?: To some extend
4) Are the references provided applicable and sufficient?: update relevant reference suggested
5) Are there references that are not appropriate for the topic being discussed?: No
5a) If yes, then please indicate which references should be removed.:
If you have any questions, please contact article administrator: Mr. Shri Krishna Mishrak.mishra@ieee.org |
|
发表于 2023-1-19 13:01:02