Evaluation of Hydraulic Tunnel Lining Durability Based on Entropy–G2 and Gray Correlation–TOPSIS Methods

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Title: Evaluation of Hydraulic Tunnel Lining Durability Based on Entropy-G2 Method and Grey Correlation-Topsis Method

 

1.       It is suggested to revise the manuscript for a thorough proof read by a native English

speaker to curtail grammatical errors found in the manuscript.

 

2.       Page 1: Line 14: It is mentioned as ‘the types of tunnel diseases are divided’.

 

It is suggested to use technical words for the better improvement of the manuscript.

 

3.       In the abstract section, there is no sentence breakages from the line 14-23. It is suggested to reframe the abstract section.

 

4.       Page 1: Line 35-38: The following sentence is too lengthy which is difficult for the readers to understand the content. Break and reframe the sentence to avoid complexity in reading.

 

[As an important part of the water diversion project, hydraulic tunnels are not only subject to external loading, but also in the water environment for a long time, and subject to the cyclic changes of temperature field, the hydraulic tunnel lining is easily damaged and the durability decreases, which affects the normal operation of the water diversion project].

 

5.                     Page 3: It is suggested to provide the difference and advantages between the existing methods and the proposed G2 and TOPSIS methods.

 

6.       Page 2: Line 76-84: The following sentences are unclear and too lengthy to grasp the content. It is suggested to reframe the paragraph 5 for the ease in understanding of readers.

 

[In this paper, on the basis of organizing the common diseases of hydraulic tunnel lining, a more complete hydraulic tunnel durability evaluation index system is established; then the G2 method is modified with the entropy value method to make it a subjective and objective assignment method to calculate the comprehensive weight of each index in the evaluation system; the TOPSIS method has been improved with grey correlation to take into account both the distance and shape to the positive and negative ideal solutions in order to grade the durability condition of the tunnels; finally, through example applications, the lining durability ratings of five sections of the Pandoling Tunnel are calculated to verify the accuracy of the 84 evaluation method in this paper.]

 

7.       Page 2: Section 2: The authors just discussed the existing theory contents of tunnel lining problems and its types. It is suggested to reframe the section and provide the inference from the author’s side.

 

8.       It is suggested to include the nomenclature portion for the ease in understanding of the abbreviated terms.

 

9.       Page 15 & 16: It is suggested to maintain the contiguity in the conclusion section.

 

10.   References and citations are not in accordance with the journal format. It is suggested to revise the reference section.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Please refer to the comments as marked in the manuscript. Thank you.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper titled "Evaluation of Hydraulic Tunnel Lining Durability Based on Entropy-G2 Method and Grey Correlation-TOPSIS Method" presents a set of evaluation methods for assessing the durability of hydraulic tunnel linings. The abstract provides a clear overview of the problem being addressed and the proposed approach, making it easy for readers to understand the context and objectives of the study.

 

Strengths:

1. The article covers an interesting and relevant topic concerning the evaluation of hydraulic tunnel lining durability. The subject matter is important for ensuring the safe and reliable operation of tunnels under long-term water flow conditions.

2. The proposed evaluation approach, which modifies the G2 method using the entropy value method and integrates the grey correlation degree with the TOPSIS method, is intriguing. The combination of these techniques shows promise in enhancing the accuracy of the evaluation process.

3. The overall quality of the work is commendable. The authors have provided a well-structured and coherent study that presents the methodology and its application in a clear manner.

 

Weaknesses:

1. The language and grammar need to be checked by a native speaker to ensure clarity and coherence. This step will help avoid any misunderstandings or misinterpretations of the presented content.

2. The article lacks a clear definition of the novelty and unique contributions of the proposed approach. While the method appears promising, the authors should explicitly highlight what sets their work apart from earlier studies and clearly discuss the advantages and limitations of their approach.

3. The Conclusions section needs to be expanded to include directions for future research. This will provide readers with insights into potential areas of improvement and further investigation related to the proposed evaluation method.

4. More extended comparisons with other existing methods are necessary to validate the effectiveness of the proposed approach. Comparative analyses will help establish the superiority of the method over alternative techniques.

5. The literature review requires expansion to encompass more related works. Including references like Liu (2022) and Krishankumar & Pamucar (2023) will enrich the discussion and demonstrate how the proposed method fits within the broader context of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA).

6. The article should extend the introduction section to provide a more comprehensive background of the problem and its significance in the field of hydraulic tunnel engineering.

7. Justification for using the TOPSIS method in the proposed approach should be elaborated upon in the article. A more detailed explanation of how TOPSIS aligns with the specific requirements of the tunnel lining durability evaluation would strengthen the study.

I suggest a Major Revision. Overall, the article showcases an interesting and high-quality study on evaluating hydraulic tunnel lining durability. However, to further enhance its scholarly impact and comprehensibility, the authors must address the mentioned weaknesses through a major revision. Improving language clarity, emphasizing novelty, expanding comparative analyses, and incorporating future research directions are crucial steps to make this study more robust and impactful in the field of hydraulic tunnel engineering.

[1] Liu, Q. (2022). TOPSIS Model for evaluating the corporate environmental performance under intuitionistic fuzzy environment. International Journal of Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Engineering Systems, 26, 149–157.

[2] Krishankumar, R., & Pamucar, D. (2023). Solving barrier ranking in clean energy adoption: An MCDM approach with q-rung orthopair fuzzy preferences. International Journal of Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Engineering Systems, 27, 55–72. 

none

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments were addressed and the manuscript can be recommended for acceptance in present form.

Reviewer 2 Report

1. Please delete the word "s" in methods in the title.

Minor English revisions are required. 

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper has been improved and can be acceptyed in its current form

none