The main contribution of this manuscript is a multi-object optimization method for journal bearing. The structure and language of this article is clear. The method, termed as HOA in this manuscript, is a combination of genetic algorithm and sequential quadratic programming. The lubrication behaviour was obtained by an empirical model for time efficiency. From bearing design point-of-view, this is an interesting topic. However, the manuscript needs further explanations prior to its publication.

1. The role of AI, as pointed out on p. 3 l. 23-25 needs further explanation, how the aforementioned methods relate to AI. Otherwise, it should be left out.
2. To my understanding, the speed N, load W and diameter D are also used as fixed variables. This was not clear and should therefore be mentioned on page 8 in the context of the design variables.
3. In page 9 line 30-32, the authors claimed that “Rapid convergence to a global minimum is achieved first using MOGA, followed by an accurate estimation of the minimum point using SQP”. For a better comparation, the optimization results or the consumed time of single MOGA and the HOA may be presented together.
4. The viscosity of the lubricant is selected as a design variable in section 3. But in section 2, viscosity is a dependent variable of temperature. This leads to confusion. To my best knowledge, the inlet viscosity of the lubricant should be treated as a design variable.
5. One of the key points for the multi-object optimization is how to deal with the conflicts between different state variables as shown in Figure 3. Please give a better clarification about this in your method.
6. On page 14, it is stated that the optimum viscosity decreases with increasing load. At the same time, the L/D-ratio significantly changes between 5 and 6 kN. Thus, this conclusion might be misleading and physically doubtful, as a higher load-carrying capacity is achieved with higher viscosity. An extend discussion of this subject would help.
7. Following your optimization, the So Number of your optimal solutions could be calculated to evaluate that it lays within the acceptable range (1 < So < 10)

Minor:

Rps (rounds per second) should be translated to an equivalent SI unit.
P 4. L 53 attuite angle should be attitude

I appreciate the way, the authors thoroughly evaluated and implemented my comments to improve the paper. The paper is now suitable for publication.