PONE-D-23-34170Dynamic Analysis and Optimal Control of Stochastic Information Cross-dissemination and Variation Model with Random Parametric PerturbationsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hou,

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 Jan 19 2024 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,

Sanket Kuashik, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

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

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. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. 

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

4. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

""Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

Additional Editor Comments:

The author should submit point wise reply to the reviewers comments. I recommend a major revision.

[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: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Partly

**********

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

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: N/A

Reviewer #4: N/A

**********

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: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: No

**********

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

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: 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 reviewer appreciates the paper's presentation of experiments designed by author which seems to contributing the valuable insights to stability inference in a stochastic world model. The reviewer also commends the paper for contributing to the understanding of information dynamics in social systems.

Reviewer #2: Language requires extensive revision. There are many typos and repeated words as in the paragraph between lines 16 and 26. Other examples are shown in the attached PDF file.

Reference 30 cited in the literature review but there is no clear relation with the current study.

Figures 4 to 9 are displayed in a very low resolution and hence many information are not clear.

Reviewer #3: Review Report

Manuscript ID: PONE-D-23-34170

This paper considers that there are many stochastic factors in the social system, which will result in the phenomena of information cross-dissemination and variation. The dual-system stochastic susceptible-infectious-mutant-recovered (2S2I4M2R) model of information cross-dissemination and variation is derived from this problem. Afterward, the existence of the global positive solution is demonstrated, sufficient conditions for the disappearance of information and its stationary distribution are calculated, and the optimal control strategy for the stochastic model is proposed. The numerical simulation supports the results of the theoretical analysis and is compared to the parameter variation of the deterministic model. The results demonstrate that cross-dissemination of information can result in information variation and diffusion. Meanwhile, white noise has a positive effect on information dissemination, which can be improved by adjusting the perturbation parameters.

There is some new contribution and may be consider for publication after addressing the following observations.

1. In abstract the author claims that white noise has a positive effect on information dissemination, which can be improved by adjusting the perturbation parameters.

They may provide the evidence for this either theoretically or numerically. In the current version I did not see any evidence for this claim.

2. The introduction should also make a compelling case for why the study is useful along with a clear statement of its novelty or originality by providing relevant information and providing answers to basic questions such as:

i. What is already known in the literature?

ii. What was done and how it was done?

3. The author may also add some recants work about the current study related to their work in introduction part. They may add the following but not mandatory.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41861-4

https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5016680

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2023.01.027

doi: 10.3934/math.2023210

4. Even though all the figures are available at the end, but there is no figure in the text and only captions of the figures are there, please see page from 3 onwards.

5. From page 7 onwards there is too many mathematical equations. The author may delete the unnecessary mathematical equations.

6. Improve the quality of the figures (from figure 4 and onwards)

7. In numerical simulation section, what is the criteria to choose the values of the parameters involve in model equation (1) and equation (5).

8. Which parameter is more sensitive and why in numerical simulations section. The author must write some sentences about this.

9. Author may look for some punctuation, typos and editing issues.

10. The conclusion section is too long. In general conclusion consist of what is claimed is achieved.

Reviewer #4: The paper exhibits poor writing quality and contains errors, particularly in the theoretical parts.

Comments:

1) The abbreviation for the suggested model is unclear, and I believe it should be omitted from the text.

2) The introduction lacks consistency and quality in its writing; thus, it requires significant improvement.

3) The construction of the Lyapunov function in Theorem 1 requires revision.

4) The threshold parameter determining the existence of a stationary solution should be based on stochastic perturbations.

**********

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

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: 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.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-23-34170_reviewer.pdf

Attachment

Submitted filename: Review Report_PONE-D-23-34170.pdf

Dynamic Analysis and Optimal Control of Stochastic Information Cross-dissemination and Variation Model with Random Parametric Perturbations

PONE-D-23-34170R1

Dear Author

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 will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, 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,

Sanket Kaushik, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: