Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript takes the Himalayan alpine valley in southeastern Tibet as the study area, conducts weight analysis of different influencing factors, and then uses different information value models to calculate and compare the accuracy of Engineering Disturbance Disasters Susceptibility, to determine the relatively optimized method for Disasters Susceptibility research. The study has done some work, and the model established disaster research has certain guiding significance and practical value. But the manuscript has many problems:

1. Please modify all text fonts, formula formats, etc. to be consistent.

2. There are too many long and difficult sentences in the manuscript as a whole. Please modify the entire manuscript.

3.The arrangement of chapters needs to be reorganized. The 2 material section does not seem to introduce the data, but more like analyzing the parameters. This analysis section can be adjusted to Section 4 results.

4. Some nouns and methods in the manuscript (already annotated in the text), such as ROC, PCA-IA, etc. have not been introduced. Please introduce them.

5. Please reorganize and rewrite the discussion section of the chapters.

6. Other specific issues have been annotated in the manuscript(see the attachment), please check the manuscript content for modifications.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

There are too many long and difficult sentences in the manuscript as a whole. Please modify the entire manuscript.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

First of all, the authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to you for the valuable comments which have greatly improved this paper. The revisions are clearly highlighted in revision and the explanations of your comments point-by-point are shown as followings:

1. Please modify all text fonts, formula formats, etc. to be consistent.

Response 1: We have made modifications based on your suggestions.

2. There are too many long and difficult sentences in the manuscript as a whole. Please modify the entire manuscript.

Response 2: The long sentences of the entire text have been modified.

3.The arrangement of chapters needs to be reorganized. The 2 material section does not seem to introduce the data, but more like analyzing the parameters. This analysis section can be adjusted to Section 4 results.

Response 3: Thank you very much for your suggestion. The structure of the article has been modified.

4. Some nouns and methods in the manuscript (already annotated in the text), such as ROC, PCA-IA, etc. have not been introduced. Please introduce them.

Response 4: We have made modifications based on your suggestions.

5. Please reorganize and rewrite the discussion section of the chapters.

Response 5: The discussion section of the article has been modified.

6. Other specific issues have been annotated in the manuscript (see the attachment), please check the manuscript content for modifications.

Response 6: Thank you very much for your guidance and suggestions. The article has been revised according to the annotations.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript clearly describe background, research conditions, objectives, methodology, results and conclustion. The conclusion is supported by the sound discussion and analysis. I recommend to accept as is.

No more comments.

Author Response

Besides, according to the comments of all reviewers, authors made a major revision to the manuscript. The language in the manuscript has been polished by a professional language polishing agency, and the certificate of English Language Editing is shown as follows:

Reviewer 3 Report

Title: Improving the Accuracy of Regional Engineering Disturbance Disasters Susceptibility by Optimizing Weight Calculation Methods—a case study in the Himalayan area, China

I will express some comments below.

1.      Title v1 and v2 and body text are very different!! Track change should be used, please, continue revision in MS Word> Review menu, while the track change is on for the rapid referee in the next stage. Without TrCh red or highlighted cannot be shown deleted sentences!

2.      It is suggested to present the structure of the article at the end of the introduction. At the end of the introduction add a para including 1-Gaps in the backgrounds you try to fill them, 2-your novelty and unique aspects 3-Hypothesis 4-Objectives.

3.      In Fig. 1 coordinate DMS is needed. Scale bar in km. What are the references of red points in Fig.?

4.      Put a flow chart Fig in the method. Refer and cite to “Preparedness Against Landslide Disasters with Mapping of Landslide Potential by GIS- SMCE (Yazd-Iran)”.

5.      Put an abbreviation table. What is AMTD? FSR? …

6.      Principal Component Analysis (PCA) use for factor reduction thus put this part first of the material section and concentrate to remained factors.

 

7.      Please make sure your conclusions section underscores the scientific value added to your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results, as indicated previously. Please revise your conclusion part into more detail. Basically, you should enhance your contributions, hypothesis retain/reject, limitations, implications/applications, advantages/disadvantages, policies, underscore the scientific value added to your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results and future study in this session.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

 

First of all, the authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to you for the valuable comments which have greatly improved this paper. The revisions are clearly highlighted in revision and the explanations of your comments point-by-point are shown as followings:

 

1. Title v1 and v2 and body text are very different!! Track change should be used, please, continue revision in MS Word> Review menu, while the track change is on for the rapid referee in the next stage. Without TrCh red or highlighted cannot be shown deleted sentences!

Response 1: The article title and structure have been adjusted.

2. It is suggested to present the structure of the article at the end of the introduction. At the end of the introduction add a para including 1-Gaps in the backgrounds you try to fill them, 2-your novelty and unique aspects 3-Hypothesis 4-Objectives.

Response 2: The GAP, innovation, and research objectives of the paper have been supplemented in the last paragraph of the introduction section.

3. In Fig. 1 coordinate DMS is needed. Scale bar in km. What are the references of red points in Fig.?

Response 3: (1) Added coordinate system to Figure 1; (2) The red dots in the figure represent the disaster points investigated on site and have been marked in the text.

4. Put a flow chart Fig in the method. Refer and cite to “Preparedness Against Landslide Disasters with Mapping of Landslide Potential by GIS- SMCE (Yazd-Iran)”.

Response 4: The flowchart has been supplemented according to the suggestions.

5. Put an abbreviation table. What is AMTD? FSR? …

Response 5: When abbreviations appear in the article for the first time, the full name of the abbreviation is provided, hoping that it will not cause misunderstandings for readers. Due to the lack of abbreviations in the text, there is no supplementary abbreviation table. If you feel it is necessary to supplement, I will make modifications according to your suggestions.

6. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) use for factor reduction thus put this part first of the material section and concentrate to remained factors.

Response 6: Thank you very much for your suggestion. In this article, principal component analysis is only used to calculate the weight coefficients of different evaluation factors, and it is not further related to the subsequent analysis process. In other words, principal component analysis and Logistic regression are independent of each other. As a weight calculation method, principal component analysis was used to optimize the original evaluation method of equal weight coefficient, so the results of principal component analysis will not affect other methods, so no adjustment has been made to the position of this part.

7. Please make sure your conclusions section underscores the scientific value added to your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results, as indicated previously. Please revise your conclusion part into more detail. Basically, you should enhance your contributions, hypothesis retain/reject, limitations, implications/applications, advantages/disadvantages, policies, underscore the scientific value added to your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results and future study in this session.

Response 7: The conclusion section of the paper has been revised.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript has been improved.

Author Response

First of all, the authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to you for the valuable comments which have greatly improved this paper.In this revision, in order to facilitate your positioning of the modified content, the author will mark the modifications in red font. 

Reviewer 3 Report

Review sustainability-2419432 v3 

Title: Improving the Accuracy of Regional Engineering Disturbance Disasters Susceptibility by Optimizing Weight Calculation Methods—a case study in the Himalayan area, China

I did not see the response file to the reviewers!!! I was expecting that change tracking would be enabled to see the addition and deletion of text. New items can also be seen well. i.e. The goal was not just to color the added items.

The author has tried to consider all the cases. In my opinion, it can be published carefully in the mentioned cases. I will express some remained comments below.

1.      Title v1 and v2 and body text are very different!! Track change should be used, please, continue revision in MS Word> Review menu, while the track change is on for the rapid referee in the next stage. Without TrCh red or highlighted cannot be shown deleted sentences!

2.      It is suggested to present the structure of the article at the end of the introduction. At the end of the introduction add a para including 1-Gaps in the backgrounds you try to fill them, 2-your novelty and unique aspects 3-Hypothesis 4-Objectives.

3.      In Fig. 1 coordinate DMS is needed. Scale bar in km. What are the references to red points in the Fig.?

4- Where is the abbreviation table? What is FSR? F? S? R?

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

First of all, the authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to you for the valuable comments which have greatly improved this paper. The author has adopted a revision mode in the revised version, which may not have been truly displayed due to version reasons. We apologize for this. Therefore, in this revision, in order to facilitate your positioning of the modified content, the author will mark the modifications in red font. The revisions are clearly highlighted in revision and the explanations of your comments point-by-point are shown as followings:

1. Title v1 and v2 and body text are very different!! Track change should be used, please, continue revision in MS Word> Review menu, while the track change is on for the rapid referee in the next stage. Without TrCh red or highlighted cannot be shown deleted sentences!

Response 1: The title V1 and V2 have been adjusted, and mark the modifications in red font. The title of Chapter 2 has been changed to Study area and data. The title of Chapter 3 has been changed to Methodology and analysis. The title of Chapter 3.1 has been changed to Statistic analysis.

2. It is suggested to present the structure of the article at the end of the introduction. At the end of the introduction add a para including 1-Gaps in the backgrounds you try to fill them, 2-your novelty and unique aspects 3-Hypothesis 4-Objectives.

Response 2: The GAP, innovation, and research objectives of the paper have been supplemented in the last paragraph of the introduction section. The specific content is as follows:

In previous studies, researchers have mostly considered the optimization effects of different evaluation methods, and there has been less research on weight calculation methods. Therefore, in order to improve the accuracy and rationality of the susceptibility assessment of regional engineering disturbance disasters, this paper determines the weight calculation method suitable for the study area by comparing the optimization effect of the weight calculation methods such as PCA and LR on the susceptibility assessment, which provides methods and ideas for the optimization of the susceptibility assessment methods later.

3. In Fig. 1 coordinate DMS is needed. Scale bar in km. What are the references of red points in Fig.?

Response 3: (1) Added coordinate system to Figure 1; (2) The red dots in the figure represent the disaster points investigated on site and have been marked in the text.

4. Put an abbreviation table. What is AMTD? FSR? …

Response 4: Thanks for your suggestions. And the abbreviation table has been added.