Berbagi Pengalaman Menjawab Proses Review KTI

Sharing Session PR KAKS - BRIN

1. brin.go.id
@brin_indonesia @brin.indonesia
PenulisanKaryaTulisIlmiah
oleh
DIDI ROSIYADI
BerbagiPengalamanMenjawabProses Review
KaryaTulisIlmiah(KTI)
Pusat RisetKecerdasanArtifisialdan Keamanan Siber
OrganisasiRisetElektronikadan Informatika
BADAN RISET DAN INOVASI NASIONAL
Bandung, 25 April 2024

2. ➢PublikasiKTI
➢TahapanPublikasiKTI
➢TahapRevisi
➢ContohJawabanRevisi
OUTLINE

3. JURNAL
JurnalIlmiahTerindekGlobal
❑JurnalTerindexGlobal BereputasiTinggi
❑JurnalTerindexGlobal Bereputasi
Menengah
❑JurnalTerindexGlobal Bereputasi
JurnalIlmiahNasional
❑JurnalIlmiahTerakreditasiNasional
❑JurnalIlmiahTidakTerkakreditasi
PROSIDING
ProsidingIlmiahTerindekGlobal
❑Prosiding ilmiah terindeks global lainnya
❑Prosiding ilmiah terindeks global
bereputasi
❑Prosiding ilmiah eksternal instansi dan
tidak terindeks global
❑Prosiding ilmiah internal instansi dan tidak
terindeks global
ProsidingIlmiahNasional
PUBLIKASI KTI

4. TAHAPAN PUBLIKASI KTI
Rejected
RESEARCH
Experiment/
Simulation

6. 1.Judul-Scope Jurnal
2.Tata carapenulisan–Template,Layoutgambar/table,Bahasa,typodanlainnya
3.Abstrak–Apayang diusulkan, BagaimanaMelakukannya, Apayang dihasilkan
4.Pendahuluan–LatarBelakang,pentingnyapenelitianyangdiusulkan
5.RelatedWorks –Literature review terhadapPenelitianyang dilakukansebelumnya
6.Metodayangdiusulkan–Kebaruan(Novelty) dan Kontribusi(Contibution)
7.Hasil Eksperimenatausimulasi
8.Komparasidenganeksperimen/ penelitiansebelumnya.
9.KesimpulandanPenelitianLanjutan
10.Referensidan sitasi
Hal-Halyangdikomentari

7. A blind image copyright protection scheme for e-government,
the Journal of Visual Communication and Image
Representation: JurnalTerindexGlobal BereputasiTinggi
A self recoverable dual watermarking scheme for copyright
protection and integrity verification : Multimedia Tools and
Applications (MTAP) : JurnalTerindexGlobal BereputasiTinggi
An efficient copyright protection scheme for e-government
document images : IEEE Multimedia
ContohMenjawab Proses Review KTI

8. A blind image copyright protection scheme for e-government,
the Journal of Visual Communication and Image
Representation: JurnalTerindexGlobal BereputasiTinggi

9. Reviewers' comments:
Reviewer #1: This revision addressed some of my concerns, but not all. Please see my comments as follows.
(1) The section of Introduction (6 pages) is too long. Please separate it into two sections, Introduction and Related work.
(2) Some equations are added to describe the proposed scheme, but no sufficient techniqualjustificaitonsare provided. For example, as pointed out, one
significant difference of the proposed scheme to the reference [3] is the Eq (9). Why can Eq (9) result in a more robust scheme?You should give more
explanation or justificaiton. My suggestion is to present the technical justifications about the proposed scheme in a new section.
(3) I notice that some more experiments and results are presented in Section 3. In sub-Section 3.1, the experiments use the images of "IIS" and "Man", while the
images are "Lena" and "Boat" in sub-Section 3.2. In 3.1, 8 types of attacks are reported, but there are 6 types of attacks. I can't find what the experiment settings
are in sub-Section 3.2. The authors must report the consistent results to show the strength of the proposed scheme.
Reviewer #2: The authors proposed a blind watermark scheme based on discrete cosine transform (DCT) and singular value decomposition (SVD). The genetic
algorithm (GA) is used to increase the visual quality and robustness. The combination of DCT, SVD and GA in blind watermarking seems to be novel. The
proposed scheme seems effectiveand the experiments show improvements over related algorithms. The manuscript is well organized after been revised. The
novelty of the new scheme proposed in this paper seems clear and the experiment results are persuasive. Thus, I believe that it can be accepted as it is.
Editor comments:
The major concerns raised in this round of review include:
1. The introduction section should be separated into two sections and shortened.
2. Insights and justifications of the proposed scheme should be provided.
3. The simulations and results should be consistent throughout the paper for a fair comparison.
When you resubmit, please upload a point-by-point response file explaining how you address reviewers' comment during this revision.

11. A self recoverable dual watermarking scheme for copyright
protection and integrity verification : Multimedia Tools and
Applications (MTAP) : JurnalTerindexGlobal BereputasiTinggi

13. Copyright protection scheme for e-government document
images : IEEE Multimedia

16. TERIMA KASIHTERIMA KASIH