Add references and audit reports for reviewer-suggested citations in Batch 6

Code/reports/width_optimization/3W/rbf_optimization/rbf_3W_B34_H45_TFD_W100_it8_stage1_utilization_de_summary.csv

+n_runs,min_objective,median_objective,mean_objective,std_objective,iqr_objective,median_nit,median_nfev,tw1_median,tw1_mean,tw1_std,tw1_iqr,tw2_median,tw2_mean,tw2_std,tw2_iqr,tw3_median,tw3_mean,tw3_std,tw3_iqr,n_basins,reproducibility_rate,geometry_n_basins,geometry_reproducibility_rate,dominant_basin_count,geometry_dominant_basin_count,dominant_basin_indices,geometry_dominant_basin_indices,best_basin_run_idx,best_basin_objective,best_basin_x,tw1_dominant_basin_std,tw1_dominant_basin_iqr,tw1_dominant_basin_range,tw2_dominant_basin_std,tw2_dominant_basin_iqr,tw2_dominant_basin_range,tw3_dominant_basin_std,tw3_dominant_basin_iqr,tw3_dominant_basin_range,performance_reproducibility_rate,performance_equivalent_count,performance_equivalent_indices,performance_best_objective,performance_best_run_idx,performance_relative_tolerance,performance_max_relative_error_equivalent_group,performance_objective_spread,performance_objective_iqr,n_total_runs,n_valid_runs,n_successful_runs,representative_run_idx,geometry_basin_rep_run_idx,stage1_performance_group_count
+30,-98.27567472113151,-98.2756745380866,-98.27567442093908,3.829163844539532e-07,2.7723035600502044e-07,98.0,2774.0,6.27418538721759,6.274708146462144,0.005142450597597625,0.007919621175329183,8.370889347305974,8.371276414306038,0.015876111923692118,0.02583592075833252,8.946365617390025,8.94781840512358,0.016036857016717365,0.025965293706242676,1,1.0,1,1.0,30,30,1;23;28;7;18;19;20;22;29;0;12;26;17;27;16;25;6;24;9;13;5;4;8;10;14;21;3;2;15;11,1;23;28;7;18;19;20;22;29;0;12;26;17;27;16;25;6;24;9;13;5;4;8;10;14;21;3;2;15;11,1,-98.27567472113151,"[6.2822585935378275, 8.392808938106796, 8.962070576369328]",0.005142450597597625,0.007919621175329183,0.018090376915410822,0.015876111923692118,0.02583592075833252,0.05188743444448818,0.01603685701671736,0.025965293706242676,0.050906030187942264,1.0,30,0;1;2;3;4;5;6;7;8;9;10;11;12;13;14;15;16;17;18;19;20;21;22;23;24;25;26;27;28;29,-98.27567472113151,1,0.001,2.0727619069446808e-08,2.037020749412477e-06,2.7723035600502044e-07,30,30,30,1,1,30

ManuscriptR1/ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL.bib

@@ -823,4 +823,50 @@ steel from coupon test results available. First, the theory of metal plasticity
   urldate   = {2026-04-21},
 }
 
+@Article{Sarkisian2025,
+  author  = {Sarkisian, Mark P.},
+  journal = {Structure and Infrastructure Engineering},
+  title   = {Resilient structures: materials components systems},
+  year    = {2025},
+  issn    = {1573-2479},
+  number  = {7-8},
+  pages   = {1173--1192},
+  volume  = {21},
+  doi     = {10.1080/15732479.2025.2474714},
+}
+
+@Article{Oz2025,
+  author  = {Oz, Ibrahim},
+  journal = {Structures},
+  title   = {Resilience of hospital structures under seismic loads: A case study informed by the 2023 Mara{\c{s}} earthquake},
+  year    = {2025},
+  issn    = {2352-0124},
+  pages   = {108642},
+  volume  = {74},
+  doi     = {10.1016/j.istruc.2025.108642},
+}
+
+@Article{Yao2023,
+  author  = {Yao, Yifan and Zhou, Liqi and Huang, Hua and Chen, Zhen and Ye, Yanxia},
+  journal = {Structures},
+  title   = {Cyclic performance of novel composite beam-to-column connections with reduced beam section fuse elements},
+  year    = {2023},
+  issn    = {2352-0124},
+  pages   = {842--858},
+  volume  = {50},
+  doi     = {10.1016/j.istruc.2023.02.054},
+}
+
+@Article{Yu2026,
+  author  = {Yu, Minghu and Lin, Jiekun and Zhang, Yuqiu},
+  journal = {Scientific Reports},
+  title   = {Multi-objective optimization design of linear oscillating actuator based on hybrid surrogate model},
+  year    = {2026},
+  issn    = {2045-2322},
+  number  = {1},
+  pages   = {24853},
+  volume  = {16},
+  doi     = {10.1038/s41598-026-54677-9},
+}
+
 @Comment{jabref-meta: databaseType:bibtex;}

ManuscriptR1/ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1.tex

@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ Data-driven approaches have mainly focused on response or property prediction. C
 
 All these works demonstrate the increasing interest in applying FEM-based and data-driven approaches, as well as in combining both, to analyse, understand and optimize seismic energy dissipation devices. However, most of these studies focus either on the prediction of the hysteretic response or on maximizing energy dissipation, leaving a critical aspect insufficiently explored: the need to control local damage while maintaining adequate dissipative capacity. In practice, excessive local damage may compromise structural integrity, reduce durability and lead to premature failure, even when global energy dissipation is improved.
 
-BDSL device performance therefore depends not only on global force or total dissipated energy, but on how local deformation and damage are distributed among the individual windows and the surrounding frame. The window thicknesses exert a direct control on this distribution, because they set the relative stiffness of each dissipative region and thus the balance between window activation and the inelastic demand transferred to the frame. Nonlinear FEM can resolve these local quantities, but its cost makes repeated direct optimization impractical. A surrogate-assisted approach therefore offers a practical route to search the window-thickness design space while explicitly accounting for damage-related responses.
+BDSL device performance therefore depends not only on global force or total dissipated energy, but on how local deformation and damage are distributed among the individual windows and the surrounding frame. The window thicknesses exert a direct control on this distribution, because they set the relative stiffness of each dissipative region and thus the balance between window activation and the inelastic demand transferred to the frame. Nonlinear FEM can resolve these local quantities, but its cost makes repeated direct optimization impractical. A surrogate-assisted approach therefore offers a practical route to search the window-thickness design space while explicitly accounting for damage-related responses. Surrogate-assisted engineering optimization has also been formulated through multi-objective Pareto approaches, including hybrid surrogate models coupled with evolutionary algorithms \cite{Yu2026}, whereas the present work adopts a feasibility-first hierarchical constrained formulation.
 
 The present work addresses this gap through a damage-aware surrogate-assisted optimization methodology for window-thickness optimization within five predefined BDSL geometry families. The proposed approach combines: (i) experimentally calibrated nonlinear FEM models used as numerical ground truth; (ii) supervised and radial basis function (RBF) surrogate models trained to predict local damage and distortion indicators; (iii) a Differential Evolution (DE) optimizer; and (iv) an adaptive FEM validation and retraining loop.
 
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ The contribution of this study is not the use of surrogate optimization itself,
 
 The study is deliberately component-level. It optimizes the device and evaluates its cyclic response under prescribed, displacement-controlled loading, which isolates the nonlinear response of the device and provides controlled deformation histories for comparing geometry variants. It does not analyse the response of a complete building or structural system equipped with the optimized dampers.
 
-From a broader perspective, BDSL dampers are conceived as replaceable, sacrificial components that concentrate damage away from primary structural members, which can facilitate post-event inspection, repair or replacement \cite{Xiong2024}. The present study contributes to this objective at the component level by controlling where damage develops and by protecting the surrounding frame. It does not, however, quantify resilience: metrics such as downtime, repair cost or functional recovery are not computed, and system-level resilience assessment is outside the scope of this work.
+From a broader perspective, BDSL dampers are conceived as replaceable, sacrificial components that concentrate damage away from primary structural members, which can facilitate post-event inspection, repair or replacement \cite{Xiong2024,Sarkisian2025,Yao2023}. The present study contributes to this objective at the component level by controlling where damage develops and by protecting the surrounding frame. It does not, however, quantify resilience: metrics such as downtime, repair cost or functional recovery are not computed, and system-level resilience assessment is outside the scope of this work.
 
 Figure \ref{fig:MethodologyFlowChart} summarizes the proposed workflow. The different stages of the methodology, together with the surrogate modelling, optimization strategy, validation procedure and corresponding results and conclusions, are described in the following sections.
 
@@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ The main findings of this study can be summarised as follows.
 
 The scope of these findings is limited. Only the window thicknesses were optimized; window height, spacing, corner radius, frame thickness and global proportions remained fixed within each family. The study is component-level and considers a symmetric, prescribed displacement-controlled cyclic protocol. It does not reproduce irregular, asymmetric or pulse-like earthquake demands, nor record-to-record variability, and it does not quantify structural-system-level seismic performance or resilience. In addition, the results depend on the calibrated FEM model used as ground truth, TFDMap is used as a post-processing damage indicator rather than as a constitutive fracture model, and no independent experimental test set was retained. The optimized geometries are therefore FEM-validated numerical candidates rather than experimentally validated designs.
 
-Future work should extend the design space to additional geometric and mechanical variables, such as window height, window spacing, frame thickness or global device proportions, and should reassess the surrogate strategies in the resulting higher-dimensional space. Assessing the optimized devices at the structural-system level through nonlinear time-history analyses, able to quantify inter-storey drift, floor acceleration and global energy dissipation, is a necessary next step before broader design recommendations can be established. Extending the framework to asymmetric cyclic protocols or recorded seismic displacement histories, and incorporating interpretability analyses such as SHapley Additive exPlanations \cite{Lundberg2017} to identify the main geometric drivers of damage and shear-distortion performance, are also natural developments.
+Future work should extend the design space to additional geometric and mechanical variables, such as window height, window spacing, frame thickness or global device proportions, and should reassess the surrogate strategies in the resulting higher-dimensional space. Assessing the optimized devices at the structural-system level through nonlinear time-history analyses, able to quantify inter-storey drift, floor acceleration and global energy dissipation, is a necessary next step before broader design recommendations can be established~\cite{Oz2025}. Extending the framework to asymmetric cyclic protocols or recorded seismic displacement histories, and incorporating interpretability analyses such as SHapley Additive exPlanations \cite{Lundberg2017} to identify the main geometric drivers of damage and shear-distortion performance, are also natural developments.
 
 \appendix
 

ManuscriptR1/ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1_changes.tex

 \ifdefined\pdfminorversion
 %DIF LATEXDIFF DIFFERENCE FILE
 %DIF DEL ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_submitted.tex   Mon Oct  5 15:02:51 2026
-%DIF ADD ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1.tex          Mon Oct  5 18:19:56 2026
+%DIF ADD ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1.tex          Tue Oct  6 10:06:09 2026
   \pdfminorversion=7
 \fi
 \documentclass[final,5p,times,twocolumn]{elsarticle}
@@ -142,7 +142,9 @@ Data-driven approaches have mainly focused on response or property prediction. C
 
 All these works demonstrate the increasing interest in applying FEM-based and data-driven approaches, as well as in combining both, to analyse, understand and optimize seismic energy dissipation devices. However, most of these studies focus either on the prediction of the hysteretic response or on maximizing energy dissipation, leaving a critical aspect insufficiently explored: the need to control local damage while maintaining adequate dissipative capacity. In practice, excessive local damage may compromise structural integrity, reduce durability and lead to premature failure, even when global energy dissipation is improved.
 
-\DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{BDSL device performance therefore depends not only on global force or total dissipated energy, but on how local deformation and damage are distributed among the individual windows and the surrounding frame. The window thicknesses exert a direct control on this distribution, because they set the relative stiffness of each dissipative region and thus the balance between window activation and the inelastic demand transferred to the frame. Nonlinear FEM can resolve these local quantities, but its cost makes repeated direct optimization impractical. A surrogate-assisted approach therefore offers a practical route to search the window-thickness design space while explicitly accounting for damage-related responses.
+\DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{BDSL device performance therefore depends not only on global force or total dissipated energy, but on how local deformation and damage are distributed among the individual windows and the surrounding frame. The window thicknesses exert a direct control on this distribution, because they set the relative stiffness of each dissipative region and thus the balance between window activation and the inelastic demand transferred to the frame. Nonlinear FEM can resolve these local quantities, but its cost makes repeated direct optimization impractical. A surrogate-assisted approach therefore offers a practical route to search the window-thickness design space while explicitly accounting for damage-related responses. Surrogate-assisted engineering optimization has also been formulated through multi-objective Pareto approaches, including hybrid surrogate models coupled with evolutionary algorithms \mbox{%DIFAUXCMD
+\cite{Yu2026}}\hskip0pt%DIFAUXCMD
+, whereas the present work adopts a feasibility-first hierarchical constrained formulation.
 }
 
 \DIFaddend The present work addresses this gap through a damage-aware surrogate-assisted optimization methodology \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{in which the objective is not only to maximize distortion or energy dissipation, but also to balance dissipative performance with damage indicators derived from FEM simulations}\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{for window-thickness optimization within five predefined BDSL geometry families}\DIFaddend . The proposed approach combines: (i) experimentally calibrated nonlinear FEM models used as numerical ground truth; (ii) supervised \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{and radial basis function (RBF) }\DIFaddend surrogate models trained to predict local damage and distortion indicators; (iii) a Differential Evolution (DE) optimizer; and (iv) an adaptive FEM validation and retraining loop.
@@ -154,7 +156,7 @@ All these works demonstrate the increasing interest in applying FEM-based and da
 }
 
 \DIFadd{From a broader perspective, BDSL dampers are conceived as replaceable, sacrificial components that concentrate damage away from primary structural members, which can facilitate post-event inspection, repair or replacement \mbox{%DIFAUXCMD
-\cite{Xiong2024}}\hskip0pt%DIFAUXCMD
+\cite{Xiong2024,Sarkisian2025,Yao2023}}\hskip0pt%DIFAUXCMD
 . The present study contributes to this objective at the component level by controlling where damage develops and by protecting the surrounding frame. It does not, however, quantify resilience: metrics such as downtime, repair cost or functional recovery are not computed, and system-level resilience assessment is outside the scope of this work.
 }
 
@@ -566,10 +568,13 @@ The initial DoE datasets were already adequate to obtain accurate optimized desi
 %DIFDELCMD < %%%
 \DIFdel{The proposed methodology also has some limitations that should be acknowledged. First, its reliability depends on the quality of }\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{scope of these findings is limited. Only the window thicknesses were optimized; window height, spacing, corner radius, frame thickness and global proportions remained fixed within each family. The study is component-level and considers a symmetric, prescribed displacement-controlled cyclic protocol. It does not reproduce irregular, asymmetric or pulse-like earthquake demands, nor record-to-record variability, and it does not quantify structural-system-level seismic performance or resilience. In addition, the results depend on }\DIFaddend the calibrated FEM model used \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{to generate the training data and validate the optimized designs. Second, the }\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{as ground truth, }\DIFaddend TFDMap is used \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{here }\DIFdelend as a post-processing damage indicator rather than as a constitutive fracture model\DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{; therefore, the optimized configurations should be interpreted in terms of relative damage control and proximity to critical states, not as direct predictions of crack initiation. Third, only the window thicknesses are considered as design variables; although this leads to a controlled and interpretable optimization problem, it does not exploit the full geometric flexibility of BDSL dampers. Finally, the optimized geometries should ultimately be validated experimentally before being used to establish general design recommendations}\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{, and no independent experimental test set was retained. The optimized geometries are therefore FEM-validated numerical candidates rather than experimentally validated designs}\DIFaddend .
 
-Future work should extend the design space \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{by including }\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{to }\DIFaddend additional geometric and mechanical variables, such as window height, window spacing, frame thickness or global device proportions\DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{. This extension would increase the dimensionality and complexity of the surrogate task. In those cases, the performance of RBF interpolation should therefore be reassessed. While RBF models performed very well in the present study, their efficiency and accuracy may decrease as the input spacebecomes larger or the response surfaces develop stronger local nonlinearities. In such cases, supervised ML models or hybrid surrogate strategies may become more advantageous. }%DIFDELCMD < 
+Future work should extend the design space \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{by including }\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{to }\DIFaddend additional geometric and mechanical variables, such as window height, window spacing, frame thickness or global device proportions\DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{. This extension would increase the dimensionality and complexity of the surrogate task. In those cases, the performance of RBF interpolation should therefore be reassessed. While RBF models performed very well in the present study, their efficiency and accuracy may decrease as the input spacebecomes larger or the response surfaces develop stronger local nonlinearities. In such cases, supervised ML models or hybrid surrogate strategies may become more advantageous.
+}%DIFDELCMD < 
 
 %DIFDELCMD < %%%
-\DIFdel{A complementary line of future work is the consideration of non-symmetric cyclic loading histories or recorded seismic displacement demands. The present study focuses on symmetric cyclic protocols because they provide a standardized and industry-relevant basis for the qualification of seismic energy dissipationdevices, which must satisfy prescribed cyclic testing requirements before being implemented in practice. Nevertheless, earthquake-induced demands may lead to non-symmetric deformation histories in structural components}\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{, and should reassess the surrogate strategies in the resulting higher-dimensional space. Assessing the optimized devices at the structural-system level through nonlinear time-history analyses, able to quantify inter-storey drift, floor acceleration and global energy dissipation, is a necessary next step before broader design recommendations can be established}\DIFaddend . Extending the \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{proposed }\DIFdelend framework to asymmetric cyclic protocols or \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{representative }\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{recorded }\DIFaddend seismic displacement histories\DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{would therefore be an interesting step towards broader performance assessment conditions.
+\DIFdel{A complementary line of future work is the consideration of non-symmetric cyclic loading histories or recorded seismic displacement demands. The present study focuses on symmetric cyclic protocols because they provide a standardized and industry-relevant basis for the qualification of seismic energy dissipationdevices, which must satisfy prescribed cyclic testing requirements before being implemented in practice. Nevertheless, earthquake-induced demands may lead to non-symmetric deformation histories in structural components}\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{, and should reassess the surrogate strategies in the resulting higher-dimensional space. Assessing the optimized devices at the structural-system level through nonlinear time-history analyses, able to quantify inter-storey drift, floor acceleration and global energy dissipation, is a necessary next step before broader design recommendations can be established~\mbox{%DIFAUXCMD
+\cite{Oz2025}}\hskip0pt%DIFAUXCMD
+}\DIFaddend . Extending the \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{proposed }\DIFdelend framework to asymmetric cyclic protocols or \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{representative }\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{recorded }\DIFaddend seismic displacement histories\DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{would therefore be an interesting step towards broader performance assessment conditions.
 }%DIFDELCMD < 
 
 %DIFDELCMD < %%%

R1_closed_changes_batch6C_Yao_Yu.md

+# Batch 6C — Yao 2023 and Yu 2026
+
+Minimal integration of two reviewer-suggested references approved by the authors. No unrelated text or scientific result was modified. Frozen baseline untouched; tracked version regenerated.
+
+## 1. References added
+
+| Key | Reference | DOI | Where cited |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `Yao2023` | Yao, Y., Zhou, L., Huang, H., Chen, Z., Ye, Y. *Cyclic performance of novel composite beam-to-column connections with reduced beam section fuse elements*. Structures 50:842–858, 2023. | 10.1016/j.istruc.2023.02.054 | §1 Introduction, resilience sentence (citation group only) |
+| `Yu2026` | Yu, M., Lin, J., Zhang, Y. *Multi-objective optimization design of linear oscillating actuator based on hybrid surrogate model*. Scientific Reports 16(1):24853, 2026. | 10.1038/s41598-026-54677-9 | §1 Introduction, surrogate-assisted optimization positioning sentence (new concise sentence) |
+
+Metadata for both was verified against Crossref/publisher records and the supplied PDFs.
+
+## 2. Yao insertion
+
+- **Manuscript location:** §1 Introduction, resilience paragraph (line 110).
+- **Scientific role:** sacrificial/replaceable fuse concept; concentration of plastic damage in a designated component; protection of the surrounding connection/primary system; post-earthquake repairability. Yao studies composite beam-to-column connections with reduced-beam-section fuses, **not** BDSL dampers; it is cited only as cross-system evidence of the replaceable/sacrificial fuse design philosophy.
+- **Exact citation group (after edit):** `\cite{Xiong2024,Sarkisian2025,Yao2023}`. Sentence wording unchanged.
+
+## 3. Yu insertion
+
+- **Manuscript location:** §1 Introduction, end of the surrogate-assisted-optimization paragraph (line 102).
+- **Sentence added:** "Surrogate-assisted engineering optimization has also been formulated through multi-objective Pareto approaches, including hybrid surrogate models coupled with evolutionary algorithms \cite{Yu2026}, whereas the present work adopts a feasibility-first hierarchical constrained formulation."
+- **Methodological contrast:** the sentence explicitly identifies Yu as a **multi-objective/Pareto** formulation (hybrid surrogate + evolutionary optimizer) and states that the present work instead uses a **feasibility-first hierarchical constrained** formulation. No implication is made that Yu's application is a metallic damper or that our method is Pareto/multi-objective.
+
+## 4. Bibliography entries
+
+```bibtex
+@Article{Yao2023,
+  author  = {Yao, Yifan and Zhou, Liqi and Huang, Hua and Chen, Zhen and Ye, Yanxia},
+  journal = {Structures},
+  title   = {Cyclic performance of novel composite beam-to-column connections with reduced beam section fuse elements},
+  year    = {2023},
+  issn    = {2352-0124},
+  pages   = {842--858},
+  volume  = {50},
+  doi     = {10.1016/j.istruc.2023.02.054},
+}
+
+@Article{Yu2026,
+  author  = {Yu, Minghu and Lin, Jiekun and Zhang, Yuqiu},
+  journal = {Scientific Reports},
+  title   = {Multi-objective optimization design of linear oscillating actuator based on hybrid surrogate model},
+  year    = {2026},
+  issn    = {2045-2322},
+  number  = {1},
+  pages   = {24853},
+  volume  = {16},
+  doi     = {10.1038/s41598-026-54677-9},
+}
+```
+
+Neither key previously existed; no duplicate bibliography keys.
+
+## 5. Files modified
+
+- `ManuscriptR1/ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1.tex` — citation group at line 110; one new positioning sentence at line 102.
+- `ManuscriptR1/ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL.bib` — two new entries.
+- `ManuscriptR1/ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1_changes.tex` — regenerated.
+- `R1_closed_changes_batch6C_Yao_Yu.md` — this report.
+
+No other reviewer-suggested reference was added. `ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_submitted.tex` was not modified.
+
+## Compilation
+
+- `ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1.tex`: 22 pages, no undefined citations/references, both references render.
+- `ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1_changes.tex`: 24 pages, no undefined citations/references, both references render, tracked changes render.

R1_closed_changes_batch6_references.md

+# Batch 6 — Reviewer-Suggested References
+
+Minimal bibliographic/manuscript integration. References were selected according to **scientific relevance**, not because reviewers suggested them. No scientific calculation, no unrelated manuscript modification. Frozen baseline untouched; tracked version regenerated.
+
+---
+
+## 1. References assessed
+
+Audit source: `Reviewer_reference_audit.md`, based on `Review/referencia_reviewers/` (14 PDFs + index workbook listing 20 suggested references: R2=4, R3=4, R4=12). Author decision: consider R3-01 and R3-02; exclude R2-01, R2-02, R2-03, R2-04, R3-03, R3-04 and the whole R4 block.
+
+## 2. References added
+
+Two citation-only additions:
+
+| Key | Reference | DOI | Where cited |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `Sarkisian2025` | Sarkisian, M.P. *Resilient structures: materials components systems*. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering 21(7-8):1173–1192, 2025. | 10.1080/15732479.2025.2474714 | §1 Introduction, resilience paragraph (added to the existing `\cite{Xiong2024}` group) |
+| `Oz2025` | Oz, I. *Resilience of hospital structures under seismic loads: A case study informed by the 2023 Maraş earthquake*. Structures 74:108642, 2025. | 10.1016/j.istruc.2025.108642 | §7 Conclusions, future-work sentence on structural-system nonlinear time-history analysis |
+
+Both entries were added to `ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL.bib`; keys did not previously exist; no duplicate keys in the bibliography.
+
+*Note on the Oz author name:* Crossref deposits the author fields for 10.1016/j.istruc.2025.108642 as given "OZ", family "Ibrahim", whereas the supplied PDF byline reads "OZ Ibrahim" and the same author appears as "Ibrahim Oz" on the reviewer's sibling reference (R3-04). The conventional form `author = {Oz, Ibrahim}` was used; the publisher-record ordering anomaly is recorded here for transparency.
+
+## 3. Sarkisian metadata verification
+
+- The **provided PDF** (`Review/referencia_reviewers/R3/1.pdf`) is the 2023 IALCCE proceedings paper *"Resilient structures: Materials | Components | Systems"* (Life-Cycle of Structures and Infrastructure Systems, Biondini & Frangopol Eds., 2023).
+- The **reviewer index** cites a 2025 journal article with DOI 10.1080/15732479.2025.2474714.
+- **Crossref verification** of the DOI returned: title "Resilient structures: materials components systems", author Mark P. Sarkisian, journal *Structure and Infrastructure Engineering*, volume 21, issue 7-8, pages 1173–1192, published online 2025-03-14 (print 2025-08-03), publisher Informa UK Limited.
+- **Conclusion:** the 2025 journal article is a distinct publication from the 2023 proceedings paper. Because the reviewer index cites the journal DOI and the DOI metadata is verified, the **2025 journal article** was added (not the 2023 proceedings version). The proceedings PDF was used only to understand the content, not as the cited source.
+
+Verified metadata added:
+`Sarkisian, Mark P. — Resilient structures: materials components systems — Structure and Infrastructure Engineering — 2025 — 21(7-8) — 1173–1192 — doi:10.1080/15732479.2025.2474714`.
+
+## 4. Manuscript insertion points
+
+- **Sarkisian2025** — §1 Introduction, sentence: "…BDSL dampers are conceived as replaceable, sacrificial components that concentrate damage away from primary structural members, which can facilitate post-event inspection, repair or replacement \cite{Xiong2024,Sarkisian2025}." Citation only; the resilience discussion was already bounded in Batch 3 and was not expanded.
+- **Oz2025** — §7 Conclusions, future-work sentence: "Assessing the optimized devices at the structural-system level through nonlinear time-history analyses, able to quantify inter-storey drift, floor acceleration and global energy dissipation, is a necessary next step before broader design recommendations can be established~\cite{Oz2025}." Citation only; the reference supports the *type of future analysis*, not the current BDSL results.
+
+**No new sentence or paragraph was added solely to accommodate a citation.** Both are additions to citation groups in existing sentences. No quantitative-resilience claim was introduced.
+
+## 5. References deliberately not added
+
+| Reviewer ref. | Decision | Main reason |
+|---|---|---|
+| R2-01 (Yao et al., RBS fuse connections) | Not added | Different structural system; sacrificial-fuse concept already supported by better-matched `Xiong2024`/`Motamedi2018` (duplicative). |
+| R2-02 (Wang et al., bridge-pier arched links) | Not added | No document supplied; and the revised manuscript no longer interprets the shear-distortion indicator as actual dissipated energy, so this reference is not required. |
+| R2-03 (Yu et al., actuator multi-objective surrogate) | Not added | Different application and Pareto multi-objective paradigm; present formulation is feasibility-first hierarchical. |
+| R2-04 (Zhang et al., CFRP tunnel joints) | Not added | Cross-domain experimental/numerical validation; device-matched references already support the statement. |
+| R3-03 (Liao et al., intensity-measure selection) | Not added | Probabilistic demand/fragility/IM selection; outside the component-optimization scope. |
+| R3-04 (Oz et al., tunnel under train loading) | Not added | Unrelated geotechnical/tunnel dynamics. |
+| R4-01, R4-02, R4-03, R4-04, R4-07, R4-08, R4-10 | Not added | Generic FEM studies of FGM/porous/CNT beams, plates, shells and masonry; no connection to metallic dampers, cyclic plasticity, shear links, local damage indicators or surrogate optimization. |
+| R4-05, R4-06, R4-09, R4-11, R4-12 | Not added | No PDFs retrieved (author decision not to retrieve); same generic FEM/advanced-materials family. |
+
+## 6. Scientific rationale
+
+The present study is a component-level, feasibility-first surrogate-assisted window-thickness optimization of BDSL dampers. The excluded references either duplicate better-matched existing citations, address unrelated structural systems or optimization paradigms, or belong to generic advanced-materials FEM literature that would artificially broaden the Introduction. Only two references were judged to genuinely strengthen existing, bounded statements: a general resilience reference for the sacrificial-component framing, and a nonlinear time-history study for the future-work limitation on structural-system assessment. Reviewer suggestion alone was not treated as sufficient grounds for inclusion.
+
+### Compact exclusion table
+
+| Reviewer ref. | Decision | Main reason |
+|---|---|---|
+| R2-01 | Not added | Duplicative of better-matched substitute concepts; different system. |
+| R2-02 | Not added | No document; energy-equivalence interpretation removed. |
+| R2-03 | Not added | Different application and optimization paradigm. |
+| R2-04 | Not added | Cross-domain; validation already supported. |
+| R3-01 | **Added** | Supports bounded resilience framing. |
+| R3-02 | **Added** | Supports system-level NLTHA future work. |
+| R3-03 | Not added | IM selection/fragility, out of scope. |
+| R3-04 | Not added | Tunnel/train dynamics, unrelated. |
+| R4-01…R4-12 | Not added | Generic FEM of FGM/CNT/porous structures, unrelated. |
+
+## Compilation
+
+- `ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1.tex`: compiles, 22 pages, no undefined citations/references, both new references present in the `.bbl`, no duplicate bibliography keys.
+- `ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1_changes.tex`: compiles, 24 pages, no undefined citations/references, both new references present, tracked changes render (63 additions, 47 deletions).

Reviewer_reference_Yao_Yu_audit.md

+# Focused audit: Yao 2023 and Yu 2026
+
+Read-only reassessment against the current `ManuscriptR1/ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1.tex`. No manuscript, bibliography or reviewer-response file was modified.
+
+## Yao et al. 2023
+
+- **Reference:** Yao Y., Zhou L., Huang H., Chen Z., Ye Y. (2023), *Cyclic performance of novel composite beam-to-column connections with reduced beam section fuse elements*, Structures 50, 842–858, doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2023.02.054.
+- **Relevant concept:** The paper designs a reduced-beam-section (RBS) fuse in a novel composite beam-to-column connection explicitly around *post-earthquake resilience and damage control*: plasticity is concentrated in a replaceable/repairable member to protect the joint, and the connection is intended to be recoverable after an earthquake. This is the same design philosophy as our BDSL "concentrate damage in the replaceable windows, protect the surrounding frame" argument, applied to a different structural system (steel–concrete composite frame connections).
+- **Best manuscript insertion point:** §1 Introduction, resilience sentence (line 110):
+  > "From a broader perspective, BDSL dampers are conceived as replaceable, sacrificial components that concentrate damage away from primary structural members, which can facilitate post-event inspection, repair or replacement \cite{Xiong2024,Sarkisian2025}."
+  Proposed group: `\cite{Xiong2024,Sarkisian2025,Yao2023}` — **CITATION ONLY**. No wording change required.
+  A secondary, weaker option is line 88 ("Their configuration concentrates inelastic demand in replaceable components… \cite{Malley1984,Okazaki2007}"), but the resilience sentence is the closer match (damage control, replaceability, protection of the joint/primary members).
+- **Overlap with existing references:** `Xiong2024` (replaceable steel links as structural fuses, rapid recovery) and `Motamedi2018` (repairable hysteretic fuse) already support the core concept for metallic damper-type components. Yao is therefore **largely duplicative** but adds genuine cross-system breadth (a beam-to-column connection with an RBS fuse), showing that sacrificial/replaceable fuse components are a general seismic design philosophy rather than a BDSL-specific idea. It is not needed for scientific correctness.
+- **Recommendation:** **OPTIONAL** (citation only). Add if the authors wish to broaden the sacrificial-fuse evidence across structural systems; the manuscript is adequately supported without it.
+
+## Yu et al. 2026
+
+- **Reference:** Yu M., Lin J., Zhang Y. (2026), *Multi-objective optimization design of linear oscillating actuator based on hybrid surrogate model*, Scientific Reports 16, 24853, doi:10.1038/s41598-026-54677-9.
+- **Relevant concept:** A hybrid surrogate model (weighted combination of four data-driven surrogates) coupled to an improved NSGA-II for **multi-objective Pareto optimization** of a **linear oscillating actuator**. It is a surrogate-assisted engineering design optimization study, but with an electromagnetic actuator application and a Pareto/multi-objective formulation.
+- **Best manuscript insertion point:** There is **no natural existing sentence** in R1 where this paper fits:
+  - The optimization-literature paragraph (§1, line 96) reviews optimization of **metallic dampers/shear links**; inserting an actuator study there would inappropriately broaden the scope.
+  - The surrogate-optimization motivation sentences (lines 92, 102) are general and not citation-bearing for alternative formulations.
+  - The methodology positioning sentence (§4.4, line 342: "Compared with a scalar objective that combines damage penalties and a performance term, the constrained hierarchical formulation removes the need for arbitrary relative weights…") contrasts our formulation with **penalty-based** formulations, not with multi-objective/Pareto ones.
+  A citation-only insertion is therefore not possible; it would require a new clause or sentence.
+- **Methodological differences:** Yu uses a Pareto multi-objective formulation (NSGA-II) with adaptive weighting of sub-surrogates; our study uses a **feasibility-first hierarchical constrained formulation** (hard window/frame damage-screening constraints, then a maximum-window-activation stage and a shear-distortion performance stage). The applications also differ (electromagnetic actuator vs. steel shear-link damper).
+- **Risk of misrepresentation:** Citing Yu close to our methodology could imply that our work is (or should be) a Pareto/multi-objective study. Avoiding that would require an explicit positioning clause such as "surrogate-assisted optimization has been formulated both as multi-objective Pareto problems [Yu2026] and as feasibility-first constrained problems", i.e. text created specifically to host the citation.
+- **Recommendation:** **DO NOT ADD** (primary). Fallback only if the authors explicitly want to engage this reviewer request: a **minor sentence expansion** at the end of §1 line 102 (or §4.4 line 342) stating that surrogate-assisted optimization admits different formulations (multi-objective Pareto vs. feasibility-first hierarchical) and citing Yu as an example of the former. This is not recommended, because it broadens the scope to an unrelated application and the manuscript's methodological positioning is already clear.
+
+## Final recommendation
+
+| Reference | Recommendation | Best section | Change type | Main reason |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| Yao2023 | OPTIONAL | §1 Introduction, resilience sentence (line 110) | Citation only | Directly supports the sacrificial/replaceable fuse and damage-confinement concept; adds cross-system breadth but is largely duplicative of `Xiong2024`/`Motamedi2018`. |
+| Yu2026 | DO NOT ADD | — (no natural location) | — (would require new text) | Different application (actuator) and paradigm (Pareto NSGA-II); no natural insertion point; risks misrepresenting the present feasibility-first hierarchical formulation. |
+
+**Proposed BibTeX keys (not added):** `Yao2023`, `Yu2026`. Neither exists in `ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL.bib`; no duplicate keys.
+
+## Bibliography check
+
+- `Yao2023` — absent from the bibliography and not cited in R1.
+- `Yu2026` — absent from the bibliography and not cited in R1.
+- No alternative keys for either work were found; no duplicates would be introduced.

Reviewer_reference_audit.md

+# Reviewer-Suggested Reference Audit
+
+Read-only bibliographic audit. No manuscript, bibliography or reviewer-response file was modified. Sources: `Review/referencia_reviewers/` (14 PDFs + index workbook `Referencias_recomendadas_revisores_STRUCTURES-D-26-06676.xlsx`, which lists 20 suggested references), `Review/STRUCTURES-D-26-06676-reviews.pdf`, and the current `ManuscriptR1/ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL_R1.tex` / `.bib`.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Executive summary
+
+- The reviewers suggested **20 references** (R2: 4, R3: 4, R4: 12) according to the index workbook; only **14 documents** are present in the folder.
+- **None** of the 20 is currently in the `.bib` or cited in the R1 manuscript.
+- **None** is a strong, necessary addition (category A). The suggested set is dominated by (i) off-domain FEM studies of functionally graded/porous/CNT-reinforced beams, plates and shells (R4), and (ii) structural-system/seismic-resilience studies (R3) that do not match the component-level, surrogate-optimization scope.
+- Only **two** are worth considering as optional, citation-only additions (category B): Sarkisian (broad resilience framing) and Oz (structural-system nonlinear time-history analysis, for the existing future-work sentence).
+- **Twelve** are not recommended (categories C/D/E); **six** cannot be assessed because no document was provided (category F).
+- Recommendation: do **not** cite the R4 FEM block; the manuscript is not a generic FEM-methodology paper, and inserting those references would artificially broaden its scope. Cite at most the two optional resilience/system-level references, and only if the authors wish to strengthen the bounded resilience and future-work sentences already present.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Reference inventory
+
+Folder `Review/referencia_reviewers/` contains: `R2/{1,3,4}.pdf`, `R3/{1,2,3,4}.pdf`, `R4/{1,2,3,4,7,8,10}.pdf`, and the index workbook. Metadata below is taken from the documents where verifiable and otherwise from the curated index; discrepancies are flagged.
+
+| ID | Authors | Title | Venue | Year | Vol/issue | Pages/art. | DOI | Document present |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| R2-01 | Yao, Zhou, Huang, Chen, Ye | Cyclic performance of novel composite beam-to-column connections with reduced beam section fuse elements | Structures | 2023 | 50 | 842–858 | 10.1016/j.istruc.2023.02.054 | yes |
+| R2-02 | Wang et al. | Seismic performance investigation of external arched energy-dissipation links in precast segmental concrete-filled steel-tube bridge piers | Structures | 2025 | 81 | 110172 | 10.1016/j.istruc.2025.110172 | **no** (index only) |
+| R2-03 | Yu, Lin, Zhang | Multi-objective optimization design of linear oscillating actuator based on hybrid surrogate model | Scientific Reports | 2026 | 16 | 24853 | 10.1038/s41598-026-54677-9 | yes |
+| R2-04 | Zhang, Huang, Lin, Lin, Yang, Huan | Experimental and numerical investigation of mechanical behavior of segmental joint of shield tunneling strengthened by prestressed CFRP plates | Structures | 2024 | 70 | 107634 | 10.1016/j.istruc.2024.107634 | yes |
+| R3-01 | Sarkisian | Resilient structures: Materials \| Components \| Systems | Structure and Infrastructure Engineering (index) / Life-Cycle of Structures and Infrastructure Systems, IALCCE proceedings (provided PDF) | 2025 (index) / 2023 (PDF) | 21(7–8) (index) | 1173–1192 (index) | 10.1080/15732479.2025.2474714 | yes — **venue/year discrepancy between index and provided PDF; metadata requires verification** |
+| R3-02 | Oz | Resilience of hospital structures under seismic loads: A case study informed by the 2023 Maraş earthquake | Structures | 2025 | 74 | 108642 | 10.1016/j.istruc.2025.108642 | yes |
+| R3-03 | Liao, Forcellini, Fang, Sun | An entropy-based multi-criteria approach for intensity measure selection in seismic resilience of structures | Resilient Cities and Structures | 2026 | 5(1) | 1–13 | 10.1016/j.rcns.2025.12.005 | yes |
+| R3-04 | Oz, Turan, Abdel Raheem | Response of a circular tunnel in saturated potentially liquefiable ground with an annular rubber soil mixture cushion under moving train loading | Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering | 2026 | 210 | 110591 | 10.1016/j.soildyn.2026.110591 | yes |
+| R4-01 | Youzera et al. | Nonlinear FE model for dynamic analysis of sandwich beams with frequency-dependent viscoelastic core | Mechanics Research Communications | 2026 | 154 | 104719 | 10.1016/j.mechrescom.2026.104719 | yes |
+| R4-02 | Bousmaha et al. | On the dynamic behavior of plates made of porous advanced materials reinforced with CNT using a p-version FEM | Mechanics Based Design of Structures and Machines | 2026 (online 2025) | 54(1) | 2534679 | 10.1080/15397734.2025.2534679 | yes |
+| R4-03 | Youzera et al. | Finite element formulation for free vibration analysis of porous FGM beams under thermal excitation | Computers and Concrete | 2025 | 36(4) | 419–430 | 10.12989/cac.2025.36.4.419 | yes |
+| R4-04 | Meftah et al. | Simplified homogenization technique for nonlinear FE analysis of in-plane loaded masonry walls | Engineering Structures | 2024 | 306 | 117822 | 10.1016/j.engstruct.2024.117822 | yes |
+| R4-05 | Tounsi et al. | A FE approach for forced dynamical responses of porous FG nanocomposite beams on viscoelastic foundations | Int. J. Structural Stability and Dynamics | 2024/2026 | 26(11) | 2650078 | 10.1142/S0219455426500781 | **no** (index only) |
+| R4-06 | Belabed et al. | Accurate free and forced vibration of FGM sandwich beams with variable cross-section: a FE assessment | Mechanics Based Design of Structures and Machines | 2024 | 52(11) | 9144–9177 | 10.1080/15397734.2024.2337914 | **no** (index only) |
+| R4-07 | Belabed, Bousahla, Tounsi | Vibrational and elastic stability of FG-CNTRC beams via a new Quasi-3D FE model | Computers and Concrete | 2024 | 34(5) | 625–648 | 10.12989/cac.2024.34.5.625 | yes |
+| R4-08 | Belabed et al. | Mechanical behavior of FG-CNTRC porous beams on Winkler/Pasternak foundations: a FE approach | Computers and Concrete | 2024 | 34(4) | 447–476 | 10.12989/cac.2024.34.4.447 | yes |
+| R4-09 | Belabed et al. | Free vibration of bi-directional FGM beams using a simple FE model | Structural Engineering and Mechanics | 2024 | 90(3) | 233–252 | 10.12989/sem.2024.90.3.233 | **no** (index only) |
+| R4-10 | Lakhdar et al. | Free vibration and bending of porous bi-directional FGM sandwich shell using TSDT p-version FEM | Acta Mechanica | 2024 | 235 | 3657–3686 | 10.1007/s00707-024-03909-y | yes |
+| R4-11 | Belabed et al. | Elastic stability and free vibration of FGM porous beams on Winkler–Pasternak foundations via FE | Geomechanics and Engineering | 2024 | 36(2) | 183–204 | 10.12989/gae.2024.36.2.183 | **no** (index only) |
+| R4-12 | Bentrar et al. | Effect of porosity distribution on free vibration of FGM sandwich plate using P-version FEM | Structural Engineering and Mechanics | 2023 | 88(6) | 551–567 | 10.12989/sem.2023.88.6.551 | **no** (index only) |
+
+---
+
+## 3. References recommended for inclusion
+
+**None.** No suggested reference is judged essential for a statement that the current component-level, surrogate-optimization manuscript must make and does not already support.
+
+---
+
+## 4. References potentially useful but optional
+
+### R3-01 — Sarkisian, *Resilient structures: Materials | Components | Systems*
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R3, additional comment on resilience (p.6, lines 255–262).
+- **Main topic:** General framework linking materials, components and structural systems to resilience; fuse devices, isolation, self-centering.
+- **Actual connection:** Supports the bounded resilience paragraph added in Batch 3 (replaceable sacrificial components; damage confinement; repair/replacement; functional recovery).
+- **Classification:** B.
+- **Recommended location:** §1 Introduction, resilience paragraph (the sentence citing `Xiong2024`).
+- **Change required:** CITATION ONLY.
+- **Why consider:** It is the only suggested reference that directly reinforces the resilience framing at the level already present. Not essential, because `Xiong2024` already supports the replaceable-component concept.
+- **Useful concept:** resilience as a life-cycle objective for components and systems.
+- **Proposed key:** `Sarkisian2025` (note: venue/year discrepancy with the provided PDF must be resolved before adding).
+
+### R3-02 — Oz, *Resilience of hospital structures under seismic loads*
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R3, additional comment on resilience (p.6, lines 255–262).
+- **Main topic:** Nonlinear time-history analysis of a hospital building (fixed-base, SSI, base-isolated).
+- **Actual connection:** Illustrates the structural-system nonlinear time-history analysis that the manuscript explicitly lists as required future work.
+- **Classification:** B (use only to support the stated limitation/future work).
+- **Recommended location:** §7 Conclusions, future-work sentence on structural-system nonlinear time-history analyses (inter-storey drift, floor acceleration, global energy dissipation).
+- **Change required:** CITATION ONLY.
+- **Why consider:** Provides a concrete example of the system-level analysis that is outside the present scope; must not be used to imply the present article performs such analyses.
+- **Useful concept:** NLTHA-based assessment of inter-storey drift and system performance.
+- **Proposed key:** `Oz2025`.
+
+---
+
+## 5. References not recommended for inclusion
+
+### R2-01 — Yao et al., reduced-beam-section fuse connections — **E (duplicative)**
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R2#1 (feasibility / sacrificial controlled response).
+- **Connection:** Different structural system (steel/composite beam-to-column connections), but the underlying "controlled sacrificial fuse / damage confinement" concept is already supported by `Xiong2024` (replaceable steel links) and `Motamedi2018` (repairable hysteretic fuse), which are better matched to metallic shear-type devices.
+- **Reason to exclude:** Adds essentially the same conceptual support without new context for BDSL dampers.
+
+### R2-02 — Wang et al., arched energy-dissipation links in bridge piers — **F**
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R2#2 (relating local energy dissipation to system response).
+- **Reason:** No document provided; cannot assess. Topic (bridge pier links) is distant from BDSL dampers, and the manuscript deliberately does not establish a distortion–energy correlation, so the reviewer's intended use is not available.
+
+### R2-03 — Yu, Lin & Zhang, multi-objective surrogate optimization of an actuator — **C (indirect/weak)**
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R2#3 (methodological comparison for multi-objective surrogate-assisted design).
+- **Connection:** Surrogate-assisted optimization, but an electromagnetic actuator application using a hybrid surrogate and NSGA-II Pareto optimization. The present study uses a feasibility-first hierarchical constrained formulation, not a Pareto multi-objective one.
+- **Reason to exclude:** The application and the optimization paradigm differ; citing it could mis-position the methodology.
+
+### R2-04 — Zhang et al., prestressed-CFRP segmental joints — **C (indirect/weak)**
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R2#5 (local FEM validation; the reviewer explicitly notes methodological, cross-domain relevance only).
+- **Connection:** Combines experimental and numerical evidence, but for shield-tunnel joints.
+- **Reason to exclude:** The manuscript's FEM validation is already supported by device-matched references (`Yoshida2002`, `Jia2014`, `RamirezMachado2025`); a cross-domain tunnel-joint study does not strengthen it and would broaden the scope.
+
+### R3-03 — Liao et al., entropy-based intensity-measure selection — **D (not relevant)**
+- **Connection:** Probabilistic seismic demand models, fragility and intensity-measure selection — none of which is part of this component-level optimization study.
+- **Reason to exclude:** Different problem (IM selection/uncertainty), no supporting statement in the manuscript.
+
+### R3-04 — Oz et al., circular tunnel under train loading — **D (not relevant)**
+- **Connection:** Geotechnical/tunnel dynamics under moving train load; unrelated to metallic dampers.
+- **Reason to exclude:** No meaningful connection; clear example of a suggested reference that should not be cited.
+
+### R4-01, R4-02, R4-03, R4-04, R4-07, R4-08, R4-10 — generic FEM studies of FGM/porous/CNT beams, plates, shells and masonry — **D (not relevant)**
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R4#3 (general FEM-literature request).
+- **Connection:** These are vibration/stability/bending/dynamic FE studies of advanced composite or masonry structures. None addresses nonlinear cyclic plasticity of steel, shear-link/buckling behaviour, explicit nonlinear cyclic simulation of dissipative components, local damage indicators, or validation of metallic dampers.
+- **Reason to exclude:** The present paper is a component-level, data-driven optimization study, not a generic FEM-methodology paper. Inserting them would artificially broaden the Introduction and dilute the methodological positioning. (The index workbook itself notes these references are methodologically general and not BDSL-specific.)
+
+---
+
+## 6. References that could not be assessed
+
+- **R2-02** — Wang et al. (no document present).
+- **R4-05** — Tounsi et al. (no document present).
+- **R4-06** — Belabed et al. (no document present).
+- **R4-09** — Belabed et al. (no document present).
+- **R4-11** — Belabed et al. (no document present).
+- **R4-12** — Bentrar et al. (no document present).
+
+For all six, the index provides title/venue/DOI but no full text; their titles place them in the same generic FEM/advanced-materials family as the assessed R4 set, but classification is marked **F (cannot assess)** because the documents were not supplied.
+
+---
+
+## 7. Mapping to reviewer comments
+
+| Ref. | Reviewer comment | Reviewer request topic |
+|---|---|---|
+| R2-01 | R2#1 | Feasibility / controlled sacrificial response and damage confinement |
+| R2-02 | R2#2 | Relating local energy-dissipation components to actual system seismic response |
+| R2-03 | R2#3 | Multi-objective surrogate-assisted optimization (methodological comparison) |
+| R2-04 | R2#5 | Combining experimental and numerical evidence (validation philosophy) |
+| R3-01 | R3 (resilience) | Move from performance-based design to structural resilience |
+| R3-02 | R3 (resilience) | Resilience and structural-system seismic assessment |
+| R3-03 | R3 (resilience) | Seismic resilience, demand, fragility and uncertainty |
+| R3-04 | R3 (resilience) | Grouped with the resilience references |
+| R4-01…R4-12 | R4#3 | Additional general FEM literature |
+
+---
+
+## 8. Recommended manuscript insertion points
+
+Only for the optional references:
+
+| Ref. | Section / nearby sentence | Current topic | Claim supported | Change |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| Sarkisian2025 | §1 Introduction, resilience paragraph ("…replaceable, sacrificial components … post-event inspection, repair or replacement \cite{Xiong2024}") | Replaceable sacrificial components and functional recovery | General resilience framing of sacrificial components | CITATION ONLY (add to the existing citation group) |
+| Oz2025 | §7 Conclusions, future-work sentence ("…structural-system level through nonlinear time-history analyses …") | System-level assessment listed as future work | Example of NLTHA-based structural-system assessment | CITATION ONLY |
+
+No new sentence or paragraph is justified. In particular, no insertion point is recommended for the R4 FEM block.
+
+---
+
+## 9. Existing bibliography overlaps / duplicates
+
+- **None of the 20 suggested references is present in `ComparisonSurrogatesOptimizationBDSL.bib`** (checked by DOI and by author surname), and none is cited in R1.
+- No duplicate BibTeX keys would arise.
+- Statements the reviewers wanted supported are already covered by existing references:
+  - Replaceable/sacrificial components and damage confinement: `Xiong2024`, `Motamedi2018`, `Saleh2024`/`Saleh2026`, `Napolitano2024`.
+  - Surrogate-assisted optimization: `Zhang2017`, `Khatibinia2019`/`Khatibinia2021`, `Shi2019`, `Rios2025`.
+  - Experimental/numerical validation: `Yoshida2002`, `Jia2014`, `RamirezMachado2025`.
+  - Resilience/rapid recovery: `Xiong2024`.
+- Metadata issue to resolve before any use: **R3-01 Sarkisian** — the index lists *Structure and Infrastructure Engineering* 21(7–8) 1173–1192 (2025), whereas the provided PDF is a 2023 IALCCE proceedings paper. The correct venue/year must be confirmed.
+
+---
+
+## 10. Proposed future editing actions
+
+1. Do not add the R4 FEM block (R4-01…R4-12): no scientific connection to BDSL dampers, cyclic plasticity, shear links or surrogate optimization; the manuscript is not a general FEM-methodology article.
+2. Do not add R2-01, R2-03, R2-04 (duplicative/indirect), R3-03 or R3-04 (unrelated).
+3. Optionally add, in a later editing batch and with author confirmation:
+   - `Sarkisian2025` as a citation-only addition to the resilience sentence in §1 (after verifying the venue/year).
+   - `Oz2025` as a citation-only addition to the structural-system future-work sentence in §7.
+4. If the authors wish to keep the reviewer response fully defensible, the response letter can state that most suggested references were assessed and found to lie outside the component-level BDSL/surrogate-optimization scope, with two optional additions.
+
+---
+
+## Master table
+
+| Ref. | Reviewer comment | Topic | Relevance | Classification | Recommended section | Change required |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| R2-01 | R2#1 | RBS fuse connections | Off-domain system; concept already supported | E | — | none |
+| R2-02 | R2#2 | Bridge-pier energy links | No document | F | — | none |
+| R2-03 | R2#3 | Actuator multi-objective surrogate | Different application/paradigm | C | — | none |
+| R2-04 | R2#5 | Tunnel joint CFRP exp+num | Cross-domain only | C | — | none |
+| R3-01 | R3 resilience | Broad resilience framework | Supports resilience framing | B | §1 resilience paragraph | citation only |
+| R3-02 | R3 resilience | Hospital NLTHA | Supports future-work limitation | B | §7 future work | citation only |
+| R3-03 | R3 resilience | IM selection/fragility | Unrelated to scope | D | — | none |
+| R3-04 | R3 resilience | Tunnel/train dynamics | Unrelated | D | — | none |
+| R4-01 | R4#3 | Viscoelastic sandwich beams FEM | Not relevant | D | — | none |
+| R4-02 | R4#3 | Porous CNT plates p-FEM | Not relevant | D | — | none |
+| R4-03 | R4#3 | Porous FGM beams FEM | Not relevant | D | — | none |
+| R4-04 | R4#3 | Masonry walls nonlinear FEM | Not relevant | D | — | none |
+| R4-05 | R4#3 | Porous FG nanocomposite beams | No document | F | — | none |
+| R4-06 | R4#3 | FGM sandwich beams FEM | No document | F | — | none |
+| R4-07 | R4#3 | FG-CNTRC beams Quasi-3D FEM | Not relevant | D | — | none |
+| R4-08 | R4#3 | FG-CNTRC porous beams FEM | Not relevant | D | — | none |
+| R4-09 | R4#3 | Bi-directional FGM beams FEM | No document | F | — | none |
+| R4-10 | R4#3 | FGM sandwich shell p-FEM | Not relevant | D | — | none |
+| R4-11 | R4#3 | FGM porous beams FEM | No document | F | — | none |
+| R4-12 | R4#3 | FGM sandwich plate p-FEM | No document | F | — | none |
+
+**Totals:** inspected 20 (14 documents + 6 index-only) · recommended adding 0 · optional 2 · not recommended 12 · cannot assess 6.
+
+---
+
+## Per-reference scientific value (concise)
+
+### R2-01 Yao et al., 2023
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R2#1.
+- **Main topic:** Post-earthquake-resilient composite beam-to-column connections with reduced-beam-section fuse elements; experiments + FE.
+- **Connection:** Same conceptual principle (sacrificial fuse, damage control), different system.
+- **Classification:** E. **Location:** none. **Change:** none.
+- **Why exclude:** The replaceable-fuse concept is already supported by `Xiong2024`/`Motamedi2018`, better matched to shear-type metallic devices.
+- **Useful concept:** damage confinement in a replaceable fuse.
+
+### R2-03 Yu et al., 2026
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R2#3.
+- **Main topic:** Hybrid surrogate + NSGA-II multi-objective optimization of a linear actuator.
+- **Connection:** Surrogate optimization, but different application and Pareto paradigm; the present formulation is feasibility-first hierarchical.
+- **Classification:** C. **Location:** none. **Change:** none.
+- **Why exclude:** Would not strengthen the specific methodological positioning and could misrepresent the formulation.
+- **Useful concept:** adaptive weighting of surrogate models.
+
+### R2-04 Zhang et al., 2024
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R2#5.
+- **Main topic:** Experimental + numerical study of prestressed-CFRP-strengthened tunnel segmental joints.
+- **Connection:** Cross-domain experimental/numerical validation philosophy.
+- **Classification:** C. **Location:** none. **Change:** none.
+- **Why exclude:** Device-matched validation references already support the statement.
+- **Useful concept:** combined experimental–numerical validation.
+
+### R3-01 Sarkisian, 2025/2023
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R3 resilience.
+- **Main topic:** Resilience across materials, components and systems; fuse devices; self-centering.
+- **Connection:** Supports the bounded resilience paragraph.
+- **Classification:** B. **Location:** §1 resilience paragraph. **Change:** citation only.
+- **Why include (optional):** Reinforces the resilience framing without expanding scope; venue/year must be verified first.
+- **Useful concept:** life-cycle resilience at component and system scales.
+
+### R3-02 Oz, 2025
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R3 resilience.
+- **Main topic:** NLTHA of a hospital building (FB, SSI, base-isolated).
+- **Connection:** Example of the structural-system NLTHA listed as future work.
+- **Classification:** B. **Location:** §7 future-work sentence. **Change:** citation only.
+- **Why include (optional):** Supports the stated limitation/future work only; must not imply the present study performs such analyses.
+- **Useful concept:** drift-based system-level assessment via NLTHA.
+
+### R3-03 Liao et al., 2026
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R3 resilience. **Main topic:** Entropy-based intensity-measure selection for seismic resilience.
+- **Connection:** Probabilistic demand/fragility/IM selection; absent from this study.
+- **Classification:** D. **Why exclude:** No supporting statement. **Useful concept:** none for this paper.
+
+### R3-04 Oz et al., 2026
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R3 resilience. **Main topic:** Circular tunnel in liquefiable ground under train loading.
+- **Connection:** None. **Classification:** D. **Why exclude:** Unrelated geotechnical dynamics. **Useful concept:** none for this paper.
+
+### R4-01 … R4-12 (FEM block)
+- **Reviewer/comment:** R4#3. **Main topic:** Generic FE vibration/stability/bending studies of FGM/porous/CNT-reinforced beams, plates, shells and masonry walls (p-version/Q3D/quasi-3D).
+- **Connection:** None to metallic dampers, cyclic plasticity, shear links, local damage indicators, explicit nonlinear cyclic simulation, or surrogate-assisted optimization.
+- **Classification:** D (assessed) / F (no document for R4-05, 06, 09, 11, 12).
+- **Location:** none. **Change:** none.
+- **Why exclude:** Inserting them would artificially broaden the Introduction into unrelated materials/FEM topics; the index itself notes they are not BDSL-specific.
+- **Useful concept:** none for this paper.