This paper reviews how the problem structure affects the results of the GA with different settings. The paper uses a local search-based algorithm for comparison purposes. Distribution of the customers plays a crucial role in the performance of the algorithms.

Generally, the paper is well structured and the subsections help the reader understand it. However, some parts of the paper should be more detailed to make the paper more replicable. The paper could be expanded crossover operators with and without mutation operators.

The introduction well structured. It proceeds from the general to the particular research question. The research question, gap of the literature, the goal of the paper are clearly defined. However, cited papers are not up to date. It will better if the author included more recent state of the art the papers

Major Points: 1. Please add the results of the study to the abstract. 2. The title and the abstract do not coincide. The title refers to the crossover operators, but there is no information about crossover operators in the abstract. Please give more information about crossover operators in the abstract. 3. Please use more recent key studies in the focus area. 4. Please give more detail about how the crossover operators are applied. 5. Please verify your results with appropriate statistical tests. 6. The encoding technique should be clearly explained how strings are partitioned into the routes.

Minor Points: 1. A flow chart for GA welcomed. 2. Please clarify the results given in Table-1. Are they the average number of evaluations for algorithms or average of the results of the algorithms? 3. Use footnotes for acronyms in the tables to make them more readable. 4. “However, the influence of the mutation operator seems to be stronger than expected and described in other publications on GAs.” Please give appropriate citations for the given claim. 5. Please specify if there is any assumptions or limitation to the study.