Bi-Level Collaborative Optimization for Medical Consumable Order Splitting and Reorganization Considering Multi-Dimensional and Multi-Scale Characteristics

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article proposes a bi-level collaborative optimization model to address the order splitting and reorganization problem in the medical consumables manufacturing industry, taking into account both multi-dimensional characteristics (such as materials, processes, and resources) and multi-scale characteristics (such as components, subassemblies, and finished products). The proposed framework integrates a hierarchical mathematical model with a hybrid NSGA-II/MOEA/D algorithm, enhanced by a collaborative iterative strategy to refine coordination between upper and lower levels. Its strengths include a well-structured methodology, the incorporation of advanced and well-justified evolutionary algorithms, the use of recent and relevant literature, and solid validation through standard multi-objective optimization indicators. Additionally, the paper implements a rigorous parameter tuning procedure based on design of experiments, which enhances transparency and reproducibility.

However, the article presents several weaknesses that should be addressed or clarified in order to strengthen its scientific soundness and practical applicability:

1. The listed contributions are mainly descriptions of the implemented work, without explicit contrast to gaps in the existing literature.

2. Several equations are presented without being referenced or explained in the main text, which hinders mathematical traceability.

3. The example shown in Figure 3 is insufficiently detailed and not linked to a real order; it lacks numeric illustration.

4. The concept of “splitting level” is not formally defined nor linked to the structure of the product or production decisions.

5. The segmentation logic of chromosomes in the lower-level encoding (Figure 6) is not explained—there is no indication of how segment boundaries are identified.

6. The satisfaction threshold used in the collaborative iterative strategy is not formally defined nor illustrated.

7. The procedure for selecting superior-level individuals (how many and by what criteria) is not explained.

8. The paper lacks a scalability analysis: all results are based on a single case study with 15 orders, without stress-testing the model under larger or more complex scenarios (this is the main issue with this study).

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

My observations about the manuscript are as follows:

1. In the Literature review section, I think that it is not necessary to include "subheadings" at the beginning of some paragraphs. I suggest that at at the end of the first paragraph on page 2, the authors write: "...on the following aspects: order splitting, order reorganization,..." and then list other relevant properties. The subheadings at the beginning of the corresponding paragraphs could be removed.
2. Please check the blank space before Elgendy et al. [23] on page 3 (the last paragraph).
3. In the Modeling section, Figure 1 on page 5 is shown, with the description given on page 4. The figure contains some symbols (Oi, Sij, and Tijk), and it would be nice to briefly describe each of them, even if some of them are self-exploratory and listed in Table 1 on page 6.
4. In the description of the model, I suggest to explicitly define or describe all variables used in the equations (for example, yi in equation (1), xijp in equation (2) or qijp in equation (3)), especially those that are not listed in Table 1. This will improve understanding of what these equations represent.
5. A brief explanation of equation (14) on page 10 is recommended. Please try to avoid using abbreviations where possible to improve readability and clarity of equations.
6. If there is a reason for choosing parameter levels shown in Table 3, please state that in the text.
7. A brief explanation of what is shown in Tables 4 and 5, as well as Figure 8, would be helpful.
8. In the concluding section, please point out the potential applications of the proposed model.

The manuscript seems interesting, and the authors have invested considerable effort. With minor revisions, the manuscript can be brought to a form suitable for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article entitled "Bi-level Collaborative Optimization for Medical Consumable Order Splitting and Reorganization Considering Multi-dimensional and Multi-scale Characteristics" addresses an important issue of optimization in the medical industry. The Authors present a developed model along with empirical research. The paper has high scientific value, and the model is described correctly. I would suggest expanding the description to include potential limitations of the model. Additionally, the bibliography requires further development.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I accept the paper in present form.