Spatial Distribution Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Cultural and Tourism Resources in Xihu District of Hangzhou

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is able work. What is missing is a clear link to a broader literature in the concluding part of the paper. I would suggest some clear linking back to broader international audience. 

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Specific modifications are answered in word.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The work is well organized and documented. The introduction, methodology, discussion and conclusions are correctly written and explained.

Author Response

Thank you for your comment. Specific modifications are answered in word.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In the manuscript I found a research that is of interest to experts in the field. The authors used mathematical models to identify connections between the spatial distribution characteristics of regional cultural and tourism resources.

The five chapters paper structure is correct and these are my observations for each chapter:

-The Introduction chapter correctly presents the studied problem. However, here I identified the main problem of the work. The authors studied a limited number of scientific papers. These are predominantly works by researchers from China, an aspect that reduces the quality of the work. The authors must justify these choices so that the authors understand the particularities of this research

-The Materials and Methods chapter contains an extremely simple mathematical tool. I think the authors can describe it in much more detail and justify the choice of those relationships that seem more like the result of a student homework.

-I like the Results chapter the most. I would like the rest of the work to be at its level. I recommend keeping it in its current form

-The statements in the Discussion chapter must be connected to the previous chapter and the graphic results in the paper so that the reader can confirm their correctness

-Finally, the Discussions chapter is well formulated and I think it can remain as it is or be improved in relation to the opinions of other reviewers.

Author Response

Thank you for your comment. Specific modifications are answered in word.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper has been improved and is of interest to the reader.

Author Response

Thank you for your comment. Specific modifications are answered in word. If there are still questions to be communicated, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx