bring any valuable insight. \\
-\textcolor{blue}{\textbf{\textsc{Answer :} }}
+\textcolor{blue}{\textbf{\textsc{Answer :} Right. We have completely re-written section 5 to highlight the most significant results. }}
+\bigskip
\noindent {\bf 6.} Page 19 (most major point)
The authors state that solving the Mixed Integer Linear Program is
time-consuming, and use this point for explaining why MuDiLCO-7 is not as
in particular. \\
-\textcolor{blue}{\textbf{\textsc{Answer :} }}
+\textcolor{blue}{\textbf{\textsc{Answer :} Your remark is very interesting. We have observed that the optimal solution of the integer program is often obtained after the exploration of very few nodes of the Branch-and-Bound-tree. Therefore we conducted new simulations by applying your idea. That is to say we have stopped the resolution of the Branch-and-Bound method after a time threshold empirically defined and we retain the best feasible
+solution found by the solver. This approach allows to improve significantly the results with multirounds, especially for MuDiLCO-7.}}
\bigskip
The sentence "the centralized approaches usually suffer from the scalability
problem, making them less competitive as the network size increase" should
probably be tempered: heuristics and metaheuristics can handle very large and
-centralized problems (even if exact approaches can't), and these approaches are
+centralized problems (even if exact approaches can't), and these approaches areempirically
very popular in WSN. } \\
\textcolor{blue}{\textbf{\textsc{Answer:} Right, fixed }}\\
study not presented here". The authors should provide at least one reference
about the aforementioned study. } \\
-\textcolor{blue}{\textbf{\textsc{Answer:} }}\\
+\textcolor{blue}{\textbf{\textsc{Answer:} Right. We have included a section (section ...) dedicated to the choice and the number of primary points. }}\\
\noindent {\ding{90} Page 6, Figure 1:
All rounds seem to have the same duration. This should be stated explicitly, and
