The paper presents several critical concerns that demand close examination. Key aspects, such as the voltage and current profiles of the SC module and efficiency trends of the bidirectional converter, display overly idealized behavior, with no mention of practical deviations or operational uncertainties. Essential methodological details, including the calibration of measurement equipment and the consideration of system losses, are noticeably absent. Performance metrics, such as those in Table 3, appear to overstate the SC module’s capacity and energy-handling capabilities, selectively omitting data that could highlight potential limitations or inefficiencies. Comparisons with similar hybrid energy systems cherry-pick suboptimal alternatives, casting doubt on the validity of claimed advancements. The absence of error bars, statistical analyses, and long-term operational data further undermines confidence in results like the extended battery lifetime and thermal performance of the SC module. Misaligned references, such as overstating the practical significance of a specific control algorithm or citing general formulas without application-specific validation, exacerbate concerns about selective reporting. The lack of raw data, detailed schematics, and independent verification detracts from the study’s transparency and raises significant questions about reproducibility and reliability.
