Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The introduction provides a clear background of the problem. The quantity and quality of the cited studies are good. There are parameters in this section that are not defined clearly. In the introdusction section, the formulas are recommended to avoid.

The section 'Materials and methods is clear and well-structured. The applied formulas and algorithm are appropriate and easy to understand. The title is recommended to modify to 'Methodology', because no material is used in the study.

The results are well presented and explained. The long tables (4, 6, 8, 11) are recommended to move to the appendix.

The discussion section is too short. It should be merged with the discussion section.

The conclusions of the study and the main findings are clear.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We have included our responses in the uploaded file.

With our best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

A novel methodology for the Parallel Simulated Annealing Algorithm is proposed to solve this problem in order to overcome the runtime drawback of Classical Simulated Annealing and enhance its robustness. 

(1) The theoretical background of the proposed method is adequately detailed in the paper.

(2) More statistical methods are recommended to analyze the experimental results

(3) Correct typological mistakes and mathematical errors.

(4) The inspiration of your work must be highlighted. I would suggest adding some recent literature in the manuscript. For instance:  

https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2022.1057089；

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114629；

https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2023090；

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106724 and so on.

(5) The conclusion and motivation of the work should be added in a more clear way.

(6) At Line 164, in the Proposed Algorithm – Simulated Annealing Multi-Thread (SAMT), the authors should provide the describings about it.

(7) In Table 2 of The settings of the SAMT Algorithm, how did authors set these values? Provide the explaining about them.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I have added our responses to the uploaded file.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

OK

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you again for your contributions to our paper.

We have applied to MDPI English Editing Service. The certificate is attached.

Best Regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf