Dynamic Behavior and Optical Soliton for the M-Truncated Fractional Paraxial Wave Equation Arising in a Liquid Crystal Model
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSolitons are a significant area of nonlinear dynamics and have widespread applications in various physical fields, such as liquid crystals, nonlinear optics, and plasma, due to their remarkable properties. They have garnered considerable attention in recent years. In this work, the authors focus on exploring soliton dynamics in a liquid crystal model, which is an interesting study. However, to consider this work for publication in this journal, the authors should address the following issues:
1) The abstract should be improved and made more meaningful by including the novelty of this work.
2) The authors considered the soliton solution as ψ2(x, y, t) to perform the numerical simulations of the system. However, it is labeled as ψ4. How do you claim this solution is a bell-shaped optical soliton? It appears to be a kink-like soliton. The authors should clarify this discrepancy.
3) The authors considered perturbation forms, specifically f(ξ) = A Sin (w ξ), and f(ξ) = Ae−0.05ξ. Have you performed bifurcation and chaos analysis for both cases?
4) The authors modeled the system based on liquid crystal concepts, but I did not find any novel findings from the perspective of liquid crystals. The work appears to be limited to obtaining solutions.
5) The conclusion should be more informative for the readers.
6) The authors could include plots of soliton evolutions using the solutions (3.1) – (3.8). By varying the arbitrary parameters in the solutions, they might uncover some intriguing phenomena.
7) In my opinion, the article lacks originality and novelty. The authors are advised to improve the quality of the work by incorporating novel findings.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer #1 Comments
1. The abstract should be improved and made more meaningful by including the novelty of this work.
Answer：Thank you for the reviewer's suggestions. We will add innovative content to the abstract of this article.
2. The authors considered the soliton solution as ψ2(x, y, t) to perform the numerical simulations of the system. However, it is labeled as ψ4. How do you claim this solution is a bell-shaped optical soliton? It appears to be a kink-like soliton. The authors should clarify this discrepancy.
Answer：Thank you to the reviewer. This was due to my negligence, and I have made the necessary corrections to this issue.
3. The authors considered perturbation forms, specifically f(ξ) = A Sin (w ξ), and f(ξ) = Ae−0.05ξ. Have you performed bifurcation and chaos analysis for both cases?
Answer：Thank you to the reviewer. We draw its three-dimensional phase diagram and two-dimensional phase diagram under two different disturbances. Regarding the bifurcation diagram, we have only drawn a bifurcation diagram for periodic disturbances. Under small disturbances, the system (9) exhibits inverse periodic behavior.
4. The authors modeled the system based on liquid crystal concepts, but I did not find any novel findings from the perspective of liquid crystals. The work appears to be limited to obtaining solutions.
Answer：Thank you for the reviewer's suggestions. We will add physical explanations in the revised manuscript.
5. The conclusion should be more informative for the readers.
Answer：Thank you to the reviewer. In revising the manuscript, we have added a lot of content. This can make it easier for readers to read.
6. The authors could include plots of soliton evolutions using the solutions (3.1) – (3.8). By varying the arbitrary parameters in the solutions, they might uncover some intriguing phenomena.
Answer：Thank you for the reviewer's suggestions. We will plot all the solutions you mentioned.
7. In my opinion, the article lacks originality and novelty. The authors are advised to improve the quality of the work by incorporating novel findings.
Answer：Thank you to the reviewer. We will enrich the innovation points of this article in the introduction and conclusion sections.
Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsUnfortunately, the authors misunderstood my criticism of the paper. I mentioned in my first Report that a complete overhaul was needed, if the paper were to be reviewed again. The authors didn't understand. They simply made some cosmetic changes to the manuscript and resubmitted it . Please do not send me this paper again reviewed or otherwise.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageAs I said last time, English is not the problem.
Author Response
Unfortunately, the authors misunderstood my criticism of the paper. I mentioned in my first Report that a complete overhaul was needed, if the paper were to be reviewed again. The authors didn't understand. They simply made some cosmetic changes to the manuscript and resubmitted it . Please do not send me this paper again reviewed or otherwise.
Answer: Thank you to the reviewer. We have revised the issue you mentioned again. Thank you again for the reviewer's suggestions.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have responded to all the queries satisfactorily. As a result, this journal may publish it.
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
In this study, the authors have investigated the dynamic behavior and optical soliton for the M-truncated fractional paraxial wave equation arising in a liquid crystal model. The results presented in this manuscript are indeed interesting and contribute to the field of nonlinear dynamics and optics. However, there are a few points that the authors should address before publication:
1. While the manuscript provides valuable theoretical insights, it would be beneficial if the authors could discuss potential links to real experiments or applications. Demonstrating how theoretical findings can be applied in practical scenarios would enhance the relevance and impact of the research.
2. The authors have chosen to restrict their numerical simulations to one case, specifically ψ2.
3. In the revised version, the authors may consider commenting on related work concerning optical soliton in the space-time fractional CQNLS equation with PT-symmetric potential. Discussing the implications or comparisons with such work could enrich the discussion and provide additional context for the readers.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSee the attached file
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
See the attached file.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPlease see my comments in the attached Review of the paper. I regret to say that the manuscript is unacceptable and must be immediately withdrawn.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
The quality of the English is fairly good. Language is not the problem of this manuscript. Its content is.
