Talk:Oscillation death
I like this article, and overall I feel that it is a nice contribution to Scholarpedia. Perhaps it would be useful for me to summarize the comments which I added to the article - they are also given in boldface in the article:
In the Examples section, there are several papers (Field and Noyes 1974, etc) which are not given in the References section. This information should be added.
I have a comment in the caption of Figure 1 recommending adding k_c on the vertical axis of Figure 1.
I have a comment that I find the Brusselator discussion to be of limited usefulness. The variables and parameters are not defined, and I didn't find it to add much to the previous examples. My suggestion is to summarize that similar phenomena occur for coupled Brusselators, and leave out most of the detail and all of the numbers. An alternative is to give enough background so that someone who is unfamiliar with this system could understand and appreciate the discussion.
In the Hopf normal form example, I changed the frequency of the oscillators to \omega_j - q, and put in a comment to have the authors verify that this change is correct.
I see that the comment on a sentence being redundant has already been revised.
I also made various revisions to the wording - I don't think that these should be controversial, but the authors might want to compare with previous versions or just read through it again carefully.
====================================================
a letter sent to the editor on 26/11/2008 regarding the above review. most of the corrections of the reviewr were done. i am keeping the brusselator part.
====================================================
dear editor
i copy below the reviewer's comments with my remarks in bold letters and in square brackets ...
in particular i think that the brusselator calculations are complemantary to the experimental section that is given for the BZ reaction.
i do not want these calculations to be erased
sincerely
k. bar-eli
===========================================
I like this article, and overall I feel that it is a nice contribution to Scholarpedia. Perhaps it would be useful for me to summarize the comments which I added to the article - they are also given in boldface in the article:
In the Examples section, there are several papers (Field and Noyes 1974, etc) [[THIS REFERENCE, AS WELL AS OTHERS< HAS BEEN INTRODUCED IN THE REFERENCE SECTION]] which are not given in the References section. This information should be added.
I have a comment in the caption of Figure 1 recommending adding k_c on the vertical axis of Figure 1.
[[K_C HAS BEEN PUT ON THE HORIZONTAL AXIS(NOT THE VERTICAL)]]
I have a comment that I find the Brusselator discussion to be of limited usefulness. The variables and parameters are not defined,
[[ IHAVE ADDED AN EXPLANATION TO THE MEANING OF X, Y AND A AND B AS WELL AS CORRECTING A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IN THE EQUATION; I THINK THAT THE BRUSSELATOR EXAMPLE SHEDS LIGHT ON THE SYMMETRY BREAKING AND SHOWS CLEARLY THAT DIFFERENT CONCENTRATIONS CAN EXIST IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE INTERCONNECTED SYSTEM. THESE CALCULATIONS ADDS TO THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE PHENOMENA]]
.and I didn't find it to add much to the previous examples. My suggestion is to summarize that similar phenomena occur for coupled Brusselators, and leave out most of the detail and all of the numbers. An alternative is to give enough background so that someone who is unfamiliar with this system could understand and appreciate the discussion.
In the Hopf normal form example, I changed the frequency of the oscillators to \omega_j - q, and put in a comment to have the authors verify that this change is correct.
[[IT HAS BEEN VERIFIED AND CORRECTED]]
I see that the comment on a sentence being redundant has already been revised. OK
I also made various revisions to the wording - I don't think that these should be controversial, but the authors might want to compare with previous versions or just read through it again carefully. OK
