2209.06667
The potential roles of transacylation in intracellular lipolysis and related QSSA approximations
Ján Eliaš, Klemens Fellner, Peter Hofer, Monika Oberer, Renate Schreiber, Rudolf Zechner
wronghigh confidence
- Category
- math.DS
- Journal tier
- Specialist/Solid
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
From the paper’s own formulas T ≤ 2 (K+1)^2 [(K+1)+3K/4]/(L q̃_m) (eq. 4.19) and T90% ≈ (2/15)(1+K) (eq. 4.20), the correct algebraic consequence of imposing T ≤ T90% is L/q̃_m ≥ 15 (K+1) [(K+1)+3K/4], not L/q̃_m ≥ (15 − 3K/4)/(K+1) as stated in eq. (4.21). This is a clear algebraic error in the paper’s derivation of the threshold. The candidate solution derives the correct implication and also reproduces the paper’s K‑independent rule-of-thumb q̃_m ≤ L/15 and the explicit (κ, V) conditions (eq. 4.24). Hence, the model’s critique is right and its auxiliary conditions match the paper’s later statements. See the derivation of (4.19)–(4.21) in the paper and the conditions (4.23)–(4.24) for comparison .
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} reject
\textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid
\textbf{Justification:}
The derivation of the key sufficiency condition (4.21) contains an algebraic mistake, yielding a threshold that does not follow from the paper’s own bounds (4.19)–(4.20) and can give false assurance that T ≤ T90\%. While the qualitative discussion and the auxiliary K-independent rule-of-thumb and explicit parameter conditions are valuable, the incorrect inequality undermines Proposition 4.2’s quantitative guidance. A corrected version would need to revise the threshold and re-evaluate numerical illustrations.