1. Page 3, right column.

The proof of non-singularity of the extended Jacobian (8) presented in lines 18-
31 is mathematically incorrect since the authors incorrectly apply the implicit function theorem with the
singular load flow Jacobian. However in the response letter the authors assert that “We have never used
the implicit function theorem with the singular load flow Jacobian”. However, according to lines 21-25
“First equation implies Δx corresponds to the motion along the solvability boundary of the original system
in the voltage space. Hence, JΔx is the direction in the PQ-space that is tangential to the boundary of
solvability”. I.e. in the second sentence, the authors use linearized load flow equations JΔx+Δ{P,Q}=0 to
determine the functional dependence between variables of voltage space and of PQ-space. I.e. they
implicitly apply the implicit function theorem. But the load flow Jacobian J at the solution point of (8) is
singular; therefore the implicit function theorem cannot be used. Unlike the authors, Dobson, Canizares
and others have taken into account the second-order terms to prove non-singularity of their extended
Jacobian. Graphical illustration presented in Fig. 1 and the example in Section III.A do not prove non-
singularity of the extended Jacobian (8). First, the dashed line presented in Fig. 1 does not correspond to
an iteration procedure of solution of (8). Only a dashed curve corresponds to that procedure. Second,
numerical examples cannot be used for the proof; they can be used only for its disproof.