Efficient subcarrier allocation for smart grid communications in neighborhood area networks

Mohammad Ikram; Pan Zhiwen; Liu Nan; Haroon Ahmed

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0334161

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionFebruary 23, 2025
12 Jun 2025 Decision Letter - Rahat Ullah, Editor Dear Dr. Ikram, 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 Jul 27 2025 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. 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, Rahat Ullah, 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, we expect all author-generated code to 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: “National Key Research and Development Project: 2020YFB1806805 Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities: 2242022K60001” 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. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: All relevant data are within the manuscript and in Supporting Information files. Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition). For example, authors should submit the following data: - The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported; - The values used to build graphs; - The points extracted from images for analysis. Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study. If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories. If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access. Additional Editor Comments: All of these comments should be answered carefully. 1) The reason for representing Fig. is unclear to me. The sub-carrier allocation variable is a binary integer. How can the figure be smooth? 2. Overall, the quality of the figures and pseudocodes is completely unacceptable. 3- The tendency for figures 11 and 12 to be of a relatively uninspiring nature is a matter of concern. It is recommended that authors employ a greater variety of informative figures. 4- It is not evident that the work is innovative. It is recommended that the authors make a comparison between their work and other relevant pieces in Table 1. [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? Reviewer #1: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?> Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??> The PLOS Data policy Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??> Reviewer #1: Yes ****** Reviewer #1: 1) The reason for representing Fig. is unclear to me. The sub-carrier allocation variable is a binary integer. How can the figure be smooth? 2. Overall, the quality of the figures and pseudocodes is completely unacceptable. 3- The tendency for figures 11 and 12 to be of a relatively uninspiring nature is a matter of concern. It is recommended that authors employ a greater variety of informative figures. 4- It is not evident that the work is innovative. It is recommended that the authors make a comparison between their work and other relevant pieces in Table 1. ****** 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 ******** [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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0334161.r001
Revision 1
30 Jul 2025 Author Response Response to Editor Comments: Comment 1: “The reason for representing Fig. is unclear to me. The sub-carrier allocation variable is a binary integer. How can the figure be smooth?” Response: We thank the editor for highlighting this concern. The smoothness of the plot stems from a visual representation of the optimization surface derived from iterative evaluations of the objective function under varying binary subcarrier allocation vectors. While the allocation variable x_{\left(i,j\right)}\in{0,1} is binary, the plotted figure is not a direct mapping of these binary states. Instead, it presents a smoothed surface generated by interpolating the aggregated results over multiple simulations. This method enables clearer visualization of trade-offs in throughput, latency, and energy, making the figure more interpretable while still grounded in the binary nature of the allocation variable. We have revised the figure caption and description in the manuscript to clarify this point. Comment 2: “Overall, the quality of the figures and pseudocodes is completely unacceptable.” Response: We acknowledge the feedback and have thoroughly revised all figures and pseudocodes in the manuscript. All figures have been regenerated using high-resolution vector graphics, ensuring consistent font sizes, axis labeling, and clarity. Furthermore, the pseudocode has been reformatted using standard indentation and uniform styling, with clearly labeled input, output, and conditional logic blocks. The revised pseudocodes now follow a step-by-step, structured presentation, improving readability and technical clarity. We believe these improvements address the quality concerns comprehensively. Comment 3: “The tendency for figures 11 and 12 to be of a relatively uninspiring nature is a matter of concern. It is recommended that authors employ a greater variety of informative figures.” Response: We appreciate this constructive suggestion and have addressed it by enhancing Figures 11 and 12. Specifically, both figures now incorporate comparative trends across benchmark models, include dynamic standard deviation shading to reflect performance variability, and highlight energy and interference reduction trends over time. Additionally, we supplemented the manuscript with an alternate visualization (dual view: line and bar plots) to convey insights from multiple angles. These changes make the figures more informative and visually engaging while remaining aligned with the technical narrative. Comment 4: “It is not evident that the work is innovative. It is recommended that the authors make a comparison between their work and other relevant pieces in Table 1.” Response: We thank the editor for this important recommendation. To address this, Table 1 has been updated to include a detailed comparative analysis between our proposed AH-MORO framework and recent benchmark techniques. Moreover, Table 8 has been added to include a detailed comparative assessment between our proposed AH-MORO framework and several state-of-the-art techniques (e.g., PD-NOMA, MLIMLRN, JSPA-APDS). This comparison now highlights key technical distinctions such as real-time adaptability, hierarchical multi-objective integration, dual-layer interference suppression, and hybrid learning mechanisms. Our method uniquely balances throughput, latency, and energy under strict QoS constraints, positioning it as an innovative contribution in the field of smart grid communication systems. Response to Reviewer #1 Comment 1: “The reason for representing Fig. is unclear to me. The sub-carrier allocation variable is a binary integer. How can the figure be smooth?” Response: Thank you for raising this important point. We acknowledge that sub-carrier allocation is inherently binary; however, the smoothness observed in the plot is not a direct depiction of binary variable transitions. Rather, it represents a smoothed surface created by aggregating and interpolating multiple discrete outcomes over successive optimization iterations. These visualizations aim to illustrate the behavior of the objective function under a large number of binary allocation states processed through the hybrid GA-DRL optimizer. We have clarified this in the revised figure captions and explanatory sections to ensure accurate interpretation and technical transparency. Comment 2: “Overall, the quality of the figures and pseudocodes is completely unacceptable.” Response: We appreciate this feedback and have significantly improved the quality of all figures and pseudocode blocks. All figures have been re-rendered in high resolution (600 DPI) using vector-based tools to enhance clarity, consistency, and publication quality. Icons, labeling, axis titles, and legends have been standardized. Additionally, all pseudocode has been reformatted using consistent indentation, typographic alignment, and structured steps following standard algorithm design patterns. Each block now clearly communicates inputs, loops, conditionals, and outputs, thereby improving readability and usability. Comment 3: “The tendency for figures 11 and 12 to be of a relatively uninspiring nature is a matter of concern. It is recommended that authors employ a greater variety of informative figures.” Response: We fully agree with this comment and have completely redesigned figures 11 and 12. The updated versions now feature both line plots and bar charts with clear legends, standard deviation shading, and multiple benchmarking models for side-by-side comparison. The data has also been structured to reflect temporal trends and statistical robustness. These changes provide enhanced interpretability and a more engaging visual experience while maintaining the scientific relevance of the results. Comment 4: “It is not evident that the work is innovative. It is recommended that the authors make a comparison between their work and other relevant pieces in Table 1.” Response: We sincerely thank the reviewer for this suggestion. Table 1 has been updated to include a detailed comparative analysis between our proposed AH-MORO framework and recent benchmark techniques. Moreover, Table 8 has been added to include a detailed comparative assessment between our proposed AH-MORO framework and several state-of-the-art techniques (e.g., PD-NOMA, MLIMLRN, JSPA-APDS). This comparison now highlights key technical distinctions such as real-time adaptability, hierarchical multi-objective integration, dual-layer interference suppression, and hybrid learning mechanisms. Our method uniquely balances throughput, latency, and energy under strict QoS constraints, positioning it as an innovative contribution in the field of smart grid communication systems. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: PONE-S-25-12704-R1 Response Letter.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0334161.r002
24 Sep 2025 Decision Letter - Rahat Ullah, Editor Efficient Subcarrier Allocation for Smart Grid Communications in Neighborhood Area Networks PONE-D-25-09787R1 Dear Dr. Ikram, 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. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support . 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, Rahat Ullah, Ph.D Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): I appreciate the authors for the review, so I suggest no further revision. Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0334161.r003
Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Rahat Ullah, Editor PONE-D-25-09787R1 PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Ikram, I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team. At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following: * All references, tables, and figures are properly cited * All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission, * There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps. Lastly, 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. You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing. If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@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. Rahat Ullah Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0334161.r004

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 .