PONE-D-23-43275Arithmetic Optimization based Secure Intelligent Clustering Algorithm for Vehicular Adhoc NetworkPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ali,

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 Feb 28 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,

Pandi Vijayakumar, 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. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: 

   "This work was supported by the Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University Researchers Supporting Project number (PNURSP2023R384), Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia"

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.

4. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process.

5. Please upload a copy of Figures 1-10, to which you refer in your text on pages 2-23. If the figure is no longer to be included as part of the submission please remove all reference to it within the text.

Additional Editor Comments:

The paper has many serious technical issues with respect to the framework, contribution and figures. Also, the reviewers have given a lot of serious comments which must be corrected while submitting the revised version. So The authors should carefully revise the paper and submit the revised version.

[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: No

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

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

Reviewer #1: No

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: No

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: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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: This article proposes an algorithmic solution to the vehicular clustering problem using the Arithmetic Optimization Algorithm (AOA). The AOA mimics arithmetic operators to optimize the formation of secure vehicular clusters. Through extensive MATLAB simulations, the proposed approach is compared with benchmark algorithms, demonstrating its effectiveness in enhancing vehicular network reliability, scalability, and communication efficiency. The study evaluates the algorithm's performance under varying simulation parameters, such as transmission range, network size, and area, highlighting its potential for future applications in advanced vehicular and airborne network scenarios.

The article lacks proper organization with the absence of headings and subheadings throughout its content.

Abstract:

Clarify the specific meta-heuristic algorithm employed by AOACNET.

Provide more details on the threshold condition for authenticating nodes during cluster formation.

Specify the nature of the extensive simulation results and the metrics used for evaluation.

Introduction:

Elaborate on the unique challenges posed by the dynamic network topology in VANETs.

Include a concise comparison with existing clustering methods in VANETs to emphasize the innovation of AOACNET.

The section provides a comprehensive overview of the challenges in Vehicular Adhoc Networks (VANET) and the importance of secure vehicular clustering. However, consider breaking down the lengthy paragraphs into smaller ones for improved readability.

Motivation and Problem Statement:

The motivation for secure vehicular clustering is well-stated, particularly emphasizing the impact of malicious nodes on passenger safety. Consider providing specific examples or scenarios to illustrate the severity of the problem.

Introduction to Vehicular Clustering:

The introduction to vehicular clustering is informative. However, you may want to elaborate more on the benefits and challenges of clustering in VANETs. How does clustering address the issues of dynamic network topology and fast vehicle movement?

Importance of Optimal Clustering:

The importance of optimal clustering is highlighted, touching on factors like communication efficiency and resource utilization. Consider providing more concrete examples or studies that demonstrate the impact of optimal clustering on VANET performance.

Introduction to AOA (Arithmetic Optimization Algorithm):

The introduction to AOA is clear, but you might want to briefly explain why AOA is chosen over other meta-heuristic algorithms. What specific characteristics of AOA make it suitable for vehicular clustering?

Clarity and Organization:

The literature review provides a comprehensive overview of clustering protocols in vehicular networks. However, consider breaking down the section into smaller subsections for better organization, making it easier for readers to navigate through the content.

Taxonomy of Clustering Protocols:

The classification of clustering protocols into general-purpose and domain-specific categories is clear. Consider providing a brief summary or transition statement before introducing Fig 3 to prepare the reader for the taxonomy.

Fig 3 - Classification of Clustering Protocols:

The taxonomy figure is a valuable addition. However, ensure that the figure is adequately explained in the text. Each category and its significance should be briefly discussed.

General Purpose Clustering Protocols:

The descriptions of general-purpose clustering algorithms are informative. Consider adding a sentence or two after each algorithm to highlight its strengths or limitations in the context of vehicular networks.

Domain-Specific Clustering Protocols:

The categorization of domain-specific clustering protocols into routing, security, MAC, and QoS is effective. Ensure that each sub-section provides a concise yet comprehensive overview of the protocols within that domain.

Routing Protocols:

The description of clustering in the context of vehicular routing is clear. Consider adding a brief sentence about the importance of clustering in improving routing efficiency in VANETs.

Security Protocols:

The overview of security protocols is well-structured. However, for each protocol, consider providing a sentence about how clustering enhances security in vehicular networks.

MAC Protocols:

The section on MAC protocols is comprehensive. Consider briefly explaining how cluster-based MAC protocols address challenges like fair channel access in vehicular networks.

QoS Assurance Protocols:

The discussion on QoS assurance protocols is well-done. Consider emphasizing the role of clustering in maintaining QoS metrics and how it contributes to the overall network performance.

Meta-Heuristic Based Clustering Algorithms:

The explanation of meta-heuristic algorithms is clear. Consider adding a sentence after each algorithm to highlight its specific advantages in the context of clustering for vehicular networks.

Arithmetic Optimization Algorithm (AOA):

The introduction of AOA is well-described. Consider adding a sentence or two about why AOA is chosen as the focus of the paper and how it differs from other meta-heuristic algorithms.

Distribution Behavior of AOA:

The explanation of the distribution behavior of AOA is clear. Consider providing a brief example or analogy to help readers conceptualize the diversification and intensification phases.

Explanation of MOA Function:

The MOA function is introduced, but there's no detailed explanation of its purpose or significance. Provide more context on how it contributes to the search space creation.

Explanation of Search Space:

Clarify how the search space is represented and how candidate solutions move within this space. A visual representation or example would be beneficial.

Secure Cluster Formation (Lines 416-443):

Explanation of Secure Cluster Formation:

The section is detailed, but consider breaking down complex processes, such as Roulette Wheel Selection (RWS), into smaller steps for better understanding.

Roulette Wheel Selection (RWS):

Provide a bit more context or a simple example of how RWS works in the context of secure cluster formation.

Fitness Function

Objective Function Explanation:

Offer a brief explanation of why a multi-objective fitness function is chosen and how ψ and μ contribute to the evaluation of solutions.

Delta Difference (Equation 7):

Provide a bit more explanation or intuition behind the delta difference concept.

Repositioning Strategy

Clarification on Exploration and Exploitation:

Clearly explain the roles of exploration and exploitation in the context of repositioning. It might help to provide an example or visual aid.

Mathematical Notation:

Ensure that all symbols used in equations are defined or referenced in Table 1 for clarity.

Exploration and Exploitation Search Strategy

Explanation of Exploration and Exploitation:

Offer more insight into why certain operators are considered explorative or exploitative and how they affect the search process.

Stochastic Scaling Coefficients:

Provide a brief explanation of why stochastic scaling coefficients are necessary and how they impact the algorithm.

Pseudo Code of AOACNET

Initialization (Lines 1-3):

Clarify the purpose of parameters like 'a' and 'ϱ' in the initialization step.

Neighbor Matrix Calculation (Line 4):

Provide more details on how the Euclidean distance is used to compute the neighbor matrix. Since there are many distance calculation methods are available example Manhattan Distance, Minkowski Distance, and Hamming Distance.

Cluster Matrix Creation (Lines 10-13):

Clarify how the candidate solution contains a different number of secure clusters.

Distribution Behavior of Arithmetic Operators (Lines 14-16):

Offer more details on how the distribution behavior of operators is determined and its significance in finding near-optimal locations.

Final Output (Line 21):

Specify what the final output represents—is it the best solution in terms of the fitness function?

Consider adding comments within the pseudo-code for better readability.

Provide more contextual examples or figures where applicable to aid understanding.

Ensure that all symbols, variables, and parameters are consistently defined and explained.

Review the algorithm for any potential edge cases or scenarios not covered in the explanation.

Consider including a summary or conclusion at the end of the section to reinforce key points.

MATLAB Version:

Specify the MATLAB toolbox or specific functions used in the implementation. This adds transparency and helps others replicate the results.

Experimental Setup (Lines 538-547):

Hardware Specifications:

Include more details about the laptop's specifications, such as the processor model and architecture, to provide a clearer understanding of the computational resources.

Simulation Parameters (Table 6):

Clearly explain the significance and impact of each simulation parameter on the results. This will help readers understand the experimental design better.

AOACNET Algorithm (Lines 519-536):

Initialization (Line 1):

Explain the significance of the "direction and speed of automobiles" in the initialization step.

Cluster Formation (Lines 9-13):

Provide more details on how the cluster matrix is initialized and how the cluster formation process contributes to the overall algorithm.

Update Positions (Lines 13-15):

Clarify how the positions are updated, and explain the role of the MOA and MOP functions in this context.

Results Discussion (Lines 548-574):

Performance Metrics:

Elaborate on the significance of using "number of secure clusters" and "load balancing" as performance metrics. Why are these metrics chosen, and how do they relate to the goals of the clustering algorithm?

Figures 5 and 6:

Provide axis labels and legends to enhance the readability of the figures. This will make it easier for readers to interpret the results.

Relation between Transmission Range and Clusters:

Clarify the observed relationship between transmission range and the number of secure clusters. A more detailed explanation would add depth to the interpretation.

Discussion on Simulation Area (Lines 566-572):

Elaborate on the relationship between the simulation area and the number of secure clusters. Why does increasing the simulation area result in more secure clusters?

Numerical Analysis (Lines 575-622):

Provide a bit more context around the numerical analysis, especially the percentages mentioned in Table 7. What do these percentages represent?

Load Balance Factor (LBF) (Lines 602-616):

Equation 11:

Explain the significance of ϕc and how it influences the load balance factor. A more detailed explanation of the formula would be helpful.

Load Balance Results (Fig 10):

Add labels and legends to the figure for clarity. Also, explain the significance of the results and how they contribute to the overall assessment of the algorithm.

Conclusion (Lines 625-646):

Integration of Emerging Technologies:

Provide more details on how the proposed algorithm could adapt to emerging technologies such as 5G, 6G, and Flying Adhoc Networks (FANET). What specific challenges and optimizations are anticipated in these scenarios?

Overall Suggestions:

Consistent Terminology:

Ensure that terminology is used consistently throughout the section. For example, use either "secure clusters" or "optimal clusters" consistently.

Visual Aids:

Consider adding visual aids, such as flowcharts or diagrams, to illustrate the algorithm's steps and the experimental setup.

Interpretation Guidance:

Provide more guidance on interpreting the figures and tables. Explain the observed trends and their implications for the algorithm's performance.

Statistical Analysis:

If applicable, consider including statistical analysis of results (e.g., standard deviations) to quantify the robustness and reliability of the algorithm.

Future Work:

Expand on potential directions for future work, especially in terms of refining the algorithm or addressing specific challenges in vehicular networks.

Reference

I recommend considering the article titled "Optimized traffic flow prediction based on cluster formation and reinforcement learning" as it aligns well with the proposed system.

Reviewer #2: There is no security analysis available in this manuscript. The authors are instructed to analysis the following papers to prepare the security analysis part.

1. Dual authentication and key management techniques for secure data transmission in vehicular ad hoc networks

2. An anonymous batch authentication and key exchange protocols for 6G enabled VANETs

3.CPAV: Computationally efficient privacy preserving anonymous authentication scheme for vehicular ad hoc networks

4.Computationally efficient privacy preserving authentication and key distribution techniques for vehicular ad hoc networks

**********

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.

PONE-D-23-43275R1Arithmetic Optimization based Secure Intelligent Clustering Algorithm for Vehicular Adhoc NetworkPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ali,

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 May 17 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,

Yuanguo Bi, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

Please revise the manuscript according to the comments from reviewers.

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

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: No

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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: (No Response)

**********

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 Response)

**********

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: The author has diligently taken into consideration and appropriately addressed all the comments therefore, I recommend accepting the revised manuscript.

Reviewer #2: No proper security analysis with respect to attack scenarios. Refer the following papers for security analysis.

1.EAAP: Efficient anonymous authentication with conditional privacy-preserving scheme for vehicular ad hoc networks

2.Dual authentication and key management techniques for secure data transmission in vehicular ad hoc networks

3.An efficient anonymous mutual authentication technique for providing secure communication in mobile cloud computing for smart city applications

**********

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

**********

[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.

PONE-D-23-43275R2Arithmetic Optimization based Secure Intelligent Clustering Algorithm for Vehicular Adhoc NetworkPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ali,

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 Sep 27 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,

Zhiquan Liu, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

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.

Additional Editor Comments:

Almost all reviewers are very positive about the contribution of this paper, and also point out some constructive comments. Please revise it according to the opinions as soon as possible, and submit the revised version to ensure that this paper can be published quickly.

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

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

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #4: (No Response)

**********

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: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: 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

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: 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: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

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: Please cite the following articles that are related to the proposed article: 1. Blockchain-based batch authentication protocol for Internet of Vehicles 2. Blockchain-based mutual-healing group key distribution scheme in unmanned aerial vehicles ad-hoc network.

Reviewer #2: No comments from my side. This paper can be accepted in its current form...No comments from my side. This paper can be accepted in its current form...

Reviewer #3: 1. In-depth Discussion on Security Analysis: "Please further discuss the performance of the proposed algorithm under various malicious attacks in the security analysis section. For example, can the algorithm effectively respond to rapid changes in malicious nodes in highly dynamic environments? Additionally, considering the potential diversity of malicious node attack patterns, could you add an analysis of the algorithm's ability to detect other types of attacks, such as node hijacking?"

2. Algorithm Efficiency Comparison: "In the comparison of computation time, it is recommended to include some of the latest commonly used security algorithms in addition to the existing comparison algorithms. This will help to more comprehensively demonstrate the efficiency advantages of the proposed algorithm."

3. Real-world Scenario Testing for Latency and Network Overhead: "In the section on end-to-end latency and network overhead, it is suggested to add some test data from real network environments. These data can validate the performance of the proposed algorithm in real-world applications, especially in networks of different scales and densities."

4. Expansion of Future Work: "In the conclusion section, the directions for future work can be described more specifically, such as how to optimize the algorithm by integrating machine learning techniques, or how to further improve the algorithm to meet the specific needs of 5G and 6G networks. Detailed implementation plans and expected outcomes would help to enhance the feasibility of future work."

5. Explanation of Figures and Data: "The results presented in Figures 11, 12, and 13 should include more detailed explanations, such as the specific parameter settings of different algorithms and the network environment conditions. This information will help readers better understand the data and comparison results shown in the figures."

6.Writing and Formatting:"The overall writing of the article is smooth, but there are some minor errors, such as 'VAENT' should be 'VANET' and 'has' should be 'have.' It is recommended to carefully proofread the text. The format of the references needs to be consistent, and please ensure that all cited references are correctly listed."

Reviewer #4: In this work, the authors explore vehicular clustering as combinatorial optimization problem using the Arithmetic Optimization Algorithm (AOA) to address the issue of the 882 883 884 885 scalability and reliability of the vehicular network. This is a meaningful work. Following are some suggestions to the authors to improve the quality of the paper. The chapter numbering of the paper needs to be standardized. More details of the experimental environment should be explained. The abstract is too long. The author needs to add the latest literatures and analyze them, such as ppru: a privacy-preserving reputation updating scheme for cloud-assisted vehicular networks, trove: a context awareness trust model for vanets using reinforcement learning. The captions of Figure5 to Figure13 should be rewritten. The conclusion is too long, please refine it. Please give specific strengths of the paper in the abstract and conclusion, expressed by specific numerical indicators.

**********

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: Yes: RAJKUMAR S C

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes: Kai Yang

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.

Arithmetic Optimization based Secure Intelligent Clustering Algorithm for Vehicular Adhoc Network

PONE-D-23-43275R3

Dear Dr. Ali,

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,

Prof. Zhiquan Liu

Academic Editor

Jinan University

zqliu@vip.qq.com

https://www.zqliu.com

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Accept

Reviewers' comments: