Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Stability for a class of differential set-valued inverse variational inequalities in finite dimensional spaces

The authors explore a Carathéodory weak solution for differential SIVI regarding its stability, claiming that their results are very new (I am inclined to agree with them in the best of my knowledge), giving an example of application.

 

Section 1 – Introduction

This section has all the needed information and proper references to support this work.

Section 2 – Preliminaries

What is the purpose of remark 2.1? Can it be transformed in a lemma? It is enough to write “A set-valued mapping F is strongly monotone.”

Remark 2.2 is a common result for Lipschitz functions. So, I do not see the utility of this remark.

Section 3 – Existence …

Proofs were checked and seems to be ok. There are only small index errors that can be easily corrected by authors and doesn’t damage the value of the obtained results.

Section 4 – Stability …

Theorems 4.1 and 4.2 are great results. Nice work! There are some details that can turn some writing and explanation details simpler on proofs. The authors tried to explain all in perfect details, but some parts of explanation could be avoided since they are well known results and usually understandable by readers that work in this field.

Section 5 – An example …

Nice example.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Reviewer 2 Report

Please review the text and check whether all your sentences are clear. If not, consider rephrasing. This remark is focused on English language requirements, not study results. The research goal is clearly stated. However, please consider identifying the research gap more clearly. A scientific article is the result of research that is carried out for a purpose. It is obvious. However, research is conducted when there is a gap with existing research. The Journal does not have strict formatting requirements, but all manuscripts must contain the required sections, including Materials & Methods. Please follow the Journal's requirements. In addition, it would be great if you would provide information about future studies that may result from your research. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In its present form, the paper can not be recommended for the publication (see the reviewer's report).

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper can be recommended for the publication.