Predicting Factors Affecting Preparedness of Volcanic Eruption for a Sustainable Community: A Case Study in the Philippines

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Although it is stated by the authors as the first study to analyze and predict the factors affecting the volcanic eruption preparedness using MLA, similar studies are carried out in the literature for earthquakes and similar disasters. For the originality of the study, it is recommended that the subject be difficult and the use of up-to-date classifiers. Like Deep learning architectures instead of ANN. The findings are only the application of known old and not powerful techniques in an area of unknown difficulty. The method and method details of the study are rather weak. Comparison criteria are insufficient. I think that the manuscript cannot be accepted as it is.

Author Response

Thank you for your constructive comments and suggestions. We appreciated them and have substantially revised the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your constructive comments and suggestions. We appreciated them and have substantially revised the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

1- Figure 1 is not clear. The texts in figure 1 are not readable.
2- The texts in figure 3 are not readable. More attention should be paid to Figure 3.
3- The scatterplot should be attached.
4- The visual aspect of the work is very weak.
5- Which program did you analyze for ANN?
6- Taylor diagram, violin diagram and box-plot graphics should be drawn.
7- Analyze the accuracy of the results of the ANN and ensemble of random forest methods with the Kruskal–Wallis (KW) test.

Author Response

Thank you for the opportunity to revise our manuscript. In light of the encouragement and valuable suggestions, we have now incorporated the constructive comments and would like to submit a substantially improved manuscript to Sustainability. The previous review comments and actions taken to improve the manuscript are attached in the submission system for your evaluation. We believe that the manuscript is substantially improved after making the suggested edits and is ready for publication. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for the opportunity to revise our manuscript. In light of the encouragement and valuable suggestions, we have now incorporated the constructive comments and would like to submit a substantially improved manuscript to Sustainability. The previous review comments and actions taken to improve the manuscript are attached in the submission system for your evaluation. We believe that the manuscript is substantially improved after making the suggested edits and is ready for publication. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

thanks