Dynamic Research on Three-Player Evolutionary Game in Waste Product Recycling Supply Chain System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this paper, the authors utilize the evolutionary game to investigate a three party game problem including manufacturers,  e-commerce platforms, and  government. I have the following questions.

(1) Is the system in Figure 1 an imaginary scene or an actual case? Please give an explanation.

(2) For Equation (12), is there only 8 equilibrium points?  Is there no not 0/1 solution?

Author Response

Dear academic editor,

         Please see the attachment.

                                                                      Yours sincerely, 
                                                                       Yingying Cheng 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic is very interesting but somewhere the paper is not well structured and needs to be revised in the following thing:

(1) The motivation and novelties should be written clearly in the introduction section as a subsection. Like 

1. 1 Motivation of the work (write in brief)

1.2 Novelties of the work (write in brief)

(2) In the literature review use some table format to compare the study between your work and the published work. By taking different factors row-wise of the table and column-wise take the related papers and make a comparison.

(3) The stability analysis is done but some preliminaries should be there otherwise those not aware of stability analysis are not able to relate to the work.

(4) Is The data used in numerical hypothetical or real? It should be briefly written in the manuscript.

(5) After each figure, graph, algorithm or important equation try to write some notes, remarks or lemmas. It looks better and strengthens the manuscript.

(6) Figure 6-8 is unclear. 

(7) Discuss the managerial insights in a separate section. Write in brief how an organization can take help from this study. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2，

             Please see the attachment.

                                                                      Yours sincerely, 
                                                                       Yingying Cheng 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

I have some observations which are given below:

(i) Literature part need to be improve.

(ii) Main contribution is clearly not stated inside the manuscript.

(iii) Methodology need to be improve.

(iv) Findings are missing.

(v) Abstract need to be improve.

(vi) Conclusion need to be improve.

Based on the above mention comments minor revision is required.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3，

             Please see the attachment.

                                                                      Yours sincerely, 
                                                                       Yingying Cheng

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

     Please see the attachment.

                          Yours Sincerely

                        Yingying Cheng

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors revision in a good manner. I strongly recommended the paper. 

Author Response

Thanks for your comments and suggestions.

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

I have no question. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,
        Thanks for  your feedback and suggestions, making the quality of our manuscript even better        
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Best regards，
                                                                                             Yingying Cheng