======= Review 1 ======= *** Summary: Please comment briefly on the following: What are the major contributions of the paper? Do you consider them important? Comment on the degree of relevance, novelty, technical depth and presentation quality of the paper. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the paper? This paper discusses issues related to short-range wireless communication link in particular LED(light-emitting diode)-to-camera communication. An analytical model, describing the interaction between LED and camera, is introduced; such a model, based on a Markov-modulated Bernoulli processes, is validated in Section 3.4. In Section 5 the Authors describe the simulation platform (CAMCOMSIM SIMULATOR) which has been designed and implemented for the performance analysis of LED-to-camera communication schemes. Results provided by CAMCOM are discussed in Section 6 *** Originality and Impact: Assess the originality of the work and its contribution to the area of research Good Contribution (4) *** Presentation: Assess the quality of the presentation in terms of English, organization and completeness Definitely Well written (5) *** Technical Correctness: Assess the technical correctness of the work Good (5) *** Relevance: How relevant is the paper to MSWiM? Definitely Relevant (5) *** Reviewer Familiarity: Please assess your familiarity with the subject matter of the paper Familiar with this area of research (3) *** Recommendation: What is your overall recommendation for the paper? Likely accept (Top 20% but not top 10%) (4) *** Detailed Comments: Please provide detailed comments and suggestions to the authors for improving the paper. The paper is well organized and well written: I would suggest to include more information about the experimental results used in Section 3 to validate the analytical model ( simulation? numerical? measurements?). ======= Review 2 ======= *** Summary: Please comment briefly on the following: What are the major contributions of the paper? Do you consider them important? Comment on the degree of relevance, novelty, technical depth and presentation quality of the paper. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the paper? The paper focuses on the interesting topic of short range communication via the LED-to-camera medium. A Markov-modulated Bernoulli process to model the wireless channel in LED-to-camera communications is presented and validated using simulations and experiments. *** Originality and Impact: Assess the originality of the work and its contribution to the area of research Good Contribution (4) *** Presentation: Assess the quality of the presentation in terms of English, organization and completeness Readable (3) *** Technical Correctness: Assess the technical correctness of the work Good (5) *** Relevance: How relevant is the paper to MSWiM? Somewhat Relevant (3) *** Reviewer Familiarity: Please assess your familiarity with the subject matter of the paper Outside main area of research (1) *** Recommendation: What is your overall recommendation for the paper? Likely accept (Top 20% but not top 10%) (4) *** Detailed Comments: Please provide detailed comments and suggestions to the authors for improving the paper. This is a good paper. The analytical model seems well developed. Evaluations demonstrate the efficacy. This is a forward-looking topic which should be of interest to the communication community. Perhaps not a core topic at MSWiM but should still generate interest. While the context of the model is new. I wonder if such models have been used in other forms of radio communication and if so how could one state the novelty of this work. The related work section seems a bit too short for my liking. I would like to see some details of the experimental testbed used. The authors should not expect that readers would read an additional reference to find those detail. In general, more details about the evaluations/simulations would be useful especially given the niche topic. ======= Review 3 ======= *** Summary: Please comment briefly on the following: What are the major contributions of the paper? Do you consider them important? Comment on the degree of relevance, novelty, technical depth and presentation quality of the paper. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the paper? The authors prpose a Markov-modulated Bernoulli process to model the wireless channel in LED-to-camera communications. Quite interesting work, particularly since the LED-to-camera communication is going to see interesting developments in the near future. *** Originality and Impact: Assess the originality of the work and its contribution to the area of research Good Contribution (4) *** Presentation: Assess the quality of the presentation in terms of English, organization and completeness Good (4) *** Technical Correctness: Assess the technical correctness of the work Good (5) *** Relevance: How relevant is the paper to MSWiM? Definitely Relevant (5) *** Reviewer Familiarity: Please assess your familiarity with the subject matter of the paper Familiar with this area of research (3) *** Recommendation: What is your overall recommendation for the paper? Definite accept (Top 10%) (5) *** Detailed Comments: Please provide detailed comments and suggestions to the authors for improving the paper. The authors prpose a Markov-modulated Bernoulli process to model the wireless channel in LED-to-camera communications. Quite interesting work, particularly since the LED-to-camera communication is going to see interesting developments in the near future.