Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper deals with an application of GA peridoicity recognition and sorting of finite sequences. I would like to point out following as.

1.     Introduction, the description of previous work is well done. However, please add their feature, advantage and disadvantage by using Table.

2.     What is main object in this paper. I think the description of object is ambiguous. Please check it. Please add summarize of contribution.

3.     Authors mentioned about chaotic logistic map in section1 problem statement. However, I cannot find anywhere used chaotic logistic map through in this paper.

4.     What is the role chaotic logistic map in this paper. It is not clear.

5.     In conclusion, please add a quantitative result.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please check English grammar.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1). Line 36: The relations in the definition of the unpredictable string of length k are not clear.

 2). Introduction: The related work along with the description of the proposed method in relation to that work should be placed in a distinct section named: Related Work and the Current Contribution.

 3). Section 2.1: The Genotype and Population step defines the structure of the individuals that belong to the population. The authors must describe how this step is involved in the problem at hand. For example,  what does an individual encode in order to recognize the periodicity of the sequence? i.e., what is the definition of the feature searching space?

 4). Section 2.2: The authors should try to express the fitness function in mathematical terms.

 5). Section 2.3: The authors must report some typical mutation and crossover operations that exist in the literature and point out the differences between them and the proposed crossover and mutation operations.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

See above

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper is well revised according to reviewer's point out. Thus, I would like to decide as an "accept"

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please check English grammar.