A report on the paper titled “Isotonic Arrays in P Systems: Com-

parison and Hierarchy” (Authors: Williams Sureshkumar, Kalpana Ma-

halingam, Raghavan Rama)

Isotonic Array P system (IAPS) introduced in Reference 20 (in the list of Refer-
ences), is considered here. Certain Comparison results are given, comparing the
array generative power of IAPS with other array generating models. There are
major (besides minor issues) with the content. These issues need to be resolved
in order that the paper can be considered for publication. So the recommenda-
tion is Major Revision.

Comments:

Major issue: Theorem 1 and Theorem 3 can be considered to be the main

results while the remaining theorems are more in the nature of supporting the
work in the sense that each these theorems provides an example language com-
mon to two classes. Unfortunately, the proofs of the main results, especially
Theorem 1, are not clear and need changes and corrections. Regarding the
proof of Theorem 1, in Page 15, in the last two lines, it is mentioned as follows:
“Let l1 and l2 be the number of recursive and non-recursive rules respectively in
P2i , 1 ≤ i ≤ k respectively.” This gives an impression that all the k grammars
G2i , 1 ≤ i ≤ k of G2 have the same number of recursive rules and the same
number of non=recursive rules. This need not be the case. What is stated in
the next sentence (“The number of membranes required · · · ”) needs explana-
tion / justification.

The next sentence is more confusing : “Also, the membrane structure µ de-
pends on the order of application of these rules.” Why? How does “order of
application of rules” decide the membrane structure? The membrane structure
even in the given present form needs correction. After µ, X1 , X2 , · · · Xl are
mentioned. What are these? Do you mean I1 , I2 , · · · ? It is mentioned that
“the renaming of the nonterminals is done in membrane 2? How is this done?
The constructed membrane should have a feature which does this. A similar
statement is made in the next para.

You write : “ Suppose, assume that the recursive rules are in membrane x
· · · ” Remember you are constructing the system and you have to provide or
not provide rules in the membranes. So how can we assume · · · ? The last
sentence in the proof looks much worse: “ · · · are applied in order, until a rect-
angular array which consists of only terminal symbols, is reached” How does
one know this? A complete revamping of the proof is required.

In the Proof of Theorem 3, in the last line in page 19, it is mentioned as follows:
“each column based on the symbol of the row generated in step 1, is generated”
But how is this done? The rest of the proof makes no meaning unless this point
is cleared.

1
Minor issues are not fully listed. Only one or two items are mentioned here. The
authors need to go through the paper more carefully and correct such details.
1. In page 2, last para : “In section 3 we define isotonic array P systems with
two examples.” Definition cannot be given by means of examples. Also the def-
inition (Definition 11) seems to be already given in Reference 20.

2. In page 5, in the para “Notation” : Check the second line.