A Study on Decision-Making Opinion Exploration in Windows-Based Information Security Monitoring Tool Development

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The following paper is well written and detailed. The concept are interesting, original and expressed in a clear and exhaustive way also thanks to the use of meaningful tables and figures.

Just pay attention to the formula formatting: the parenthesis are not lined up (1) and (3) and some formulae are not centered (5) (6) and (7)...

Please, check also table 3.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

1. In abstract section, the content of the research methodology is too long. And also in abstract section, you mentioned "4 methods of research methodology", you should write "4 steps of research methodology" is better.

2. The theme and contribution of this thesis are not aligned with Journal's research theme. Please, write it more details of relation with both manuscript and Journal's theme.

3. You should remove the abbreviation in the whole text.
4. This paper has some weird sentences hard to understand. If you could re-check the English editing, it would be better.
5. The 26 of functionalities should be better likewise expression by Table.
6. The research methods (literature, Delphi, AHP, Pearson correlation, cosine distance etc.)

7. It is necessary to adjust the form. It is necessary to modify the form such as reference notation, table, figure, position of caption, etc.

8. The criteria in Figure 2. is not exclusive and also not a same level. ex. "Power on/off", "Log in/out" and "Log" is far different depth of level.

9. In the Table 23, the mean value of decision construct CD and CE are weird. It is hard to understand how the mean value exceed the range.

Author Response

Please see the attachment