Peer Review History

Original SubmissionNovember 16, 2022
Decision Letter - Talib Al-Ameri, Editor

PONE-D-22-31631Key Theories and Technologies and Implementation Mechanism of Parallel Computing for Ternary Optical ComputerPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. ZHANG,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 31 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.
If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Talib Al-Ameri, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please note that PLOS ONE has specific guidelines on code sharing for submissions in which author-generated code underpins the findings in the manuscript. In these cases, all author-generated code must be made available without restrictions upon publication of the work. Please review our guidelines at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/materials-and-software-sharing#loc-sharing-code and ensure that your code is shared in a way that follows best practice and facilitates reproducibility and reuse.

3. Please update your submission to use the PLOS LaTeX template. The template and more information on our requirements for LaTeX submissions can be found at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/latex.

4. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: 

YES,this work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 51875333 for CHEN Junwei and Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province under grant No. LQ22F020004 for WANG Xiaolin and Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 61672006 for none.

Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." 

If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. 

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

5. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

6. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

7. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The paper introduced the related technologies to exert the ability of TOC parallel computing, and gave an experimental comparison. The scientific content and the results presented in the paper are adequate for publication.

Reviewer #2: Ternary Optical Computer (TOC) is more advanced than traditional computer systems in parallel computing. Based on huge amounts of repeated computations, this paper systematically elaborates the key theories and technologies of parallel computing for the TOC through a programming platform. And experiments are carried out to show the effectiveness of the present theories and technologies for parallel computing, as well as the feasibility of the implementation method of the programming platform. Based on the study of the TOC in this paper, more complex parallel computing can be realized in the future. The scientific content and the results presented in the paper are interesting and valuable. However, I have some suggestions as follows.

(1) In the second paragraph in the section 3.1, please give the full name of TOP.

(2) In section 3.3, the working process of parallel carry-free optical adder should be charted to show the details.

(3) Pay attention to writing details, for example: the second Paragraph in the section 3.3, in the sentence “Considering that TOP has three ...” , TOP should be the TOP.

The paper can be accepted for publication after the authors finish the above modifications.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Revision 1

List of Changes in Responses to Editors’ and Reviewers’ Comments on “Key Theories and Technologies and Implementation Mechanism of Parallel Computing for Ternary Optical Computer”

Dear Ph.D. Talib Al-Ameri,

On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for all you have done on the manuscript entitled “Key Theories and Technologies and Implementation Mechanism of Parallel Computing for Ternary Optical Computer” (ID: PONE-S-22-37459). Meanwhile, we also appreciate you and reviewers very much for your helpful and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction. The Revisions are marked in the paper. The uploaded please find the revised version. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to let us know. We would like to express our great appreciation to you and the reviewers for the comments and suggestions on our paper.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Sulan ZHANG

Corresponding author:

Name: Sulan ZHANG

E-mail: zhangsl000111@163.com

List of Responses

Dear Ph.D. Talib Al-Ameri and Reviewers:

Thank you very much for your letter and the reviewers’ comments and suggestions concerning on our manuscript entitled “Key Theories and Technologies and Implementation Mechanism of Parallel Computing for Ternary Optical Computer” (ID: PONE-S-22-37459). Those comments and suggestions are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. Revised portions are marked in blue in the Revised Manuscript. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

1.General revisions

There are some modifications. List of Changes in the revised paper as follows:

1.In the 26th line, TOC-----> the TOC

2.In the 29th line, TOC-----> the TOC

3.The 30th line was added.

4.In the 81th line, TOP-----> Ternary Optical Processor (TOP)

5.In the 109th line, TOP -----> the TOP

6.In the 116th line, “Step 1:” was added.

7.In the 118th line, “Step 2:” was added.

8.In the 120th line, “Step 3:” was added.

9.In the 124th line, the sentence “The calculation process of Parallel carry-free optical adders is divided into three steps as shown in Fig 2” and the Fig 2 were added.

10.In the 201-202th line, the Fig 5 was added.

11.In the 238th line, “Results and discussion” was added.

12.In the 324th line, “C is the result of the operand a and the operand b.” was added.

More detailed modifications please refer to the Revised Manuscrip.

2.Responds to the Reviewers

Reviewer #1:

Reviewer #1: The paper introduced the related technologies to exert the ability of TOC parallel computing, and gave an experimental comparison. The scientific content and the results presented in the paper are adequate for publication.

Response to Reviewer #1:

I would like to thank the reviewer for his affirmation of this research

Reviewer #2:

Ternary Optical Computer (TOC) is more advanced than traditional computer systems in parallel computing. Based on huge amounts of repeated computations, this paper systematically elaborates the key theories and technologies of parallel computing for the TOC through a programming platform. And experiments are carried out to show the effectiveness of the present theories and technologies for parallel computing, as well as the feasibility of the implementation method of the programming platform. Based on the study of the TOC in this paper, more complex parallel computing can be realized in the future. The scientific content and the results presented in the paper are interesting and valuable. However, I have some suggestions as follows.

(1) In the second paragraph in the section 3.1, please give the full name of TOP.

(2) In section 3.3, the working process of parallel carry-free optical adder should be charted to show the details.

(3) Pay attention to writing details, for example: the second Paragraph in the section 3.3, in the sentence “Considering that TOP has three ...” , TOP should be the TOP.

The paper can be accepted for publication after the authors finish the above modifications.

First I would like to thank the reviewer for his affirmation of this research. The reply for the reviewer #2 is as follows:

Question 1: In the second paragraph in the section 3.1, please give the full name of TOP.

Response to Reviewer #2:

Thanks a lot for your suggestion. In 81th line , the full name of TOP was given, it is marked in blue.

Question 2: In section 3.3, the working process of parallel carry-free optical adder should be charted to show the details.

Response to Reviewer #2:

In 124th line , the working process of parallel carry-free optical adder should be charted to show the details as shown Fig 2.

Question 3: Pay attention to writing details, for example: the second Paragraph in the section 3.3, in the sentence “Considering that TOP has three ...” , TOP should be the TOP.

Response to Reviewer #2:

There are some modifications. List of Changes in the Revised Manuscript as follows:

1.In the 26th line, TOC-----> the TOC

2.In the 29th line, TOC-----> the TOC

3.The 30th line was added.

4.In the 81th line, TOP-----> Ternary Optical Processor (TOP)

5.In the 109th line, TOP -----> the TOP

6.In the 116th line, “Step 1:” was added.

7.In the 118th line, “Step 2:” was added.

8.In the 120th line, “Step 3:” was added.

9.In the 124th line, the sentence “The calculation process of Parallel carry-free optical adders is divided into three steps as shown in Fig 2” and the Fig 2 were added.

More detailed modifications please refer to the Revised Manuscrip.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Talib Al-Ameri, Editor

Key Theories and Technologies and Implementation Mechanism of Parallel Computing for Ternary Optical Computer

PONE-D-22-31631R1

Dear Dr. ZHANG,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Talib Al-Ameri, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Talib Al-Ameri, Editor

PONE-D-22-31631R1

Key Theories and Technologies and Implementation Mechanism of Parallel Computing for Ternary Optical Computer 

Dear Dr. ZHANG:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Talib Al-Ameri

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .