A Two-Stage Restoration Resource Allocation Model for Enhancing the Resilience of Interdependent Infrastructure Systems

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper addresses a very relevant issue. The structure and methodology are clearly presented and the assumptions are reasonably supported by the references.

The only remark deals with the choice to only consider the decision maker point of view (that is obviously the most relevant and often embodies the public authorities): in case of disaster some relevant company and suppliers might have different priorities which don’t deal with the public interest but on their own business. This is of course a side view that may be included in the further steps of the proposed study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

 

1.Based on the fact that is used a mathematical model could be useful in introduction to highlight better other similar mathematical aproches, if something in this framework of robustness of state of the art, already exists.

2.At line 323 was mentioned the fact that the section selects seven  infrastructure systems for a case study. It is necessary to explain how was considered seven (eg why not 10) and subsequently, some considerations related to sensitivity of the solution in this case.

3.The limitations of study from discussion section must be improved. For instance is not clear how the disaster scenarios (type, complexity etc) affect the analyse, in fact, a very serious aspect related to validation of the proposed model.

4.Table 1 should be renamed in relation with the content of proposed case study

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf