Complex Patterns to the (3+1)-Dimensional B-type Kadomtsev-Petviashvili-Boussinesq Equation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors use the Sine-Gordon method to find exact solutions to a Boussinesq-type equation, including both positive and negative solutions. The method is related to the tanh method, such as referenced in Ref. [20]. One thing the authors do not consider is the dynamical stability of the solutions. For positive solutions this would be standard (though this is not done here). For negative solutions, there seems to be only one work addressing the stability: Nguyen, N.T. and Kalisch, H., 2009. Orbital stability of negative solitary waves. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 80(1), pp.139-150.
I think the authors should acknowledge that the stability should be studied in the future using the method in the paper above. If this small issue is addressed, the paper can be recommended for publication.
Author Response
Please see our attached file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper is very interesting and presents unique results. However, only a few numerical examples are illustrated and I feel that it is not general enough. Perhaps the authors could conduct a linearized stability analysis and add more diversity of examples with graphics that differ to what is provided? In addition, where will this lead to? What are new problems and what are some of the unanswered questions or unsolved cases? These I feel must be addressed.
Author Response
Please see our attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The aim of this paper is to find some new solutions to the (3+1)-dimensional B-type KP-Boussinesq equation, based on the accurate sine-Gordon expansion method. But this is routine and no methodological novelty can be attributed to the authors of the present work. In fact, the real contribution of the paper is limited to at most three pages (pages 3-5), the major part of the article consisting in several graphics realized with a basic software program (pages 5-10) and a huge list of references (pages 11-16). Moreover, the paper is written careless and the English language is very bad.
On basis of the above arguments, the reviewer recommends the rejection of this submission.
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper has very interesting and promising results. However, the motivations for this paper are not very clear. It would be very beneficial if the motivations would be explained a bit more. The paper just ends abruptly and not very clear if any cases have not been solved or addressed. I feel that every paper should end with addressing unsolved cases and suggesting future problems to study and future directions to proceed. Finally, I would like the authors to mention in more detail about the diversity of graphics that appears due sensitivity to initial conditions and due to restricted intervals. Sometime the shapes are very similar and at other times there are big differences.
Reviewer 3 Report
It was written in a looesly style.
The paper is a mere adaptation of known techniques for a slightly different scenario.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
