Hazard Assessment of Rainfall–Induced Landslide Considering the Synergistic Effect of Natural Factors and Human Activities
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper provides a well-structured and informative discussion of the importance of landslide hazard risk assessment for determining the possibility of landslide occurrence and its implications for disaster prevention decision-making and sustainable urban development. The paper highlights the limitations of existing landslide risk assessment methods due to the lack of consideration of the synergistic effect of multiple factors and geographic scene heterogeneity.
The paper proposes a new landslide hazard risk assessment method that considers the synergistic effect of multiple factors, including natural factors and human activities, and the heterogeneity of geographic scenes. The proposed method is experimentally verified on rainfall-induced landslides in Dehong Prefecture, Yunnan Province, China. The paper analyzes the characteristics and impact factors of rainfall-induced landslide hazards and develops a local weighted random forest model to comprehensively evaluate the risk of rainfall-induced landslide hazards.
Overall, this paper is a valuable contribution to the literature on landslide hazard risk assessment. The proposed method has higher accuracy and interpretability than existing representative methods, and the experimental results show its usefulness in providing useful references for the prevention of landslide hazards. However, it would have been helpful if the paper had discussed the limitations and challenges associated with the proposed method and how they can be addressed in future research. Nonetheless, this paper is a significant step forward in the development of effective landslide risk assessment methods.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In the work, the authors, using spatial methods and modeling, attempted to assess the occurrence of landslide hazards as a result of the impact of precipitation and the role of natural and anthropogenic factors. The job is interesting. The authors presented a wide spectrum of data and analyzed various factors that could affect the occurrence of a landslide. The methodology of the study is correct. Also, the structure of the paper and the aesthetics of the figures made do not raise any objections. A major disadvantage of the work is a poor review of the literature, which should be supplemented before the possible publication of the work. It is also worth adding a keyword referring to the geolocation of the researched area.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Editor
I would thank you for the invitation to review the manuscript entitled "Risk assessment of rainfall-induced landslide hazards considering the synergistic effect of natural factors and human activities"
The present study discussed very important topic; authors propose a landslide hazard risk assessment method considering the synergistic effect of multiple factors, including natural factors and human activities, and the het-erogeneity of geographic scenes, the approaches in the scope of the journal, however, major revisions are suggested.
Comment #01
Introduction: Briefly review and critique the results of previous studies, the basic information should removed, moreover, authors should add the novelty of your work
Comment #02
Study Area: Provide a detailed description of the study area, in terms of population, the number of previous natural disasters resulting in losses across all sectors of agriculture, construction, and human settlement, and a precise description of the local geology
Comment #03
Experimental Data and Sources: Describe precisely the annual and monthly rainfall data because it is an important element and influences on the results of the study
Comment #04
Methodology: Explain in detail each factor and its importance, method and its impact on the result of the study
Comment #05
Authors should explain why they used only random forest for the local weighted, and don’t compared with the other ML techniques?
Comment #06
Authors should separate (results and discussion from the case study)
Comment #07
English should be improved with scientific manner
English should be improved with scientific manner
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The paper entitled 'Risk assessment of rainfall-induced landslide hazards considering the synergistic effect of natural factors and human activities' aims to assess landslide risk considering the combined influence of natural and human activities and weighted through a hierarchical procedure. Although the paper is proposed as a study of landslide hazard assessment, also evident in the introduction which is deeply focused on this concept, nevertheless the results provide an estimate of landslide susceptibility and not of hazard.
The authors have well defined the concept of hazard as the probability of occurrence of a phenomenon in space and time. To estimate landslide hazard, it is mandatory to have a return time of such an event. However, this figure is nowhere to be found in the paper and, in my opinion, cannot currently be estimated by machine learning methods.
The paper is good for publication as it considers an interesting combination of influencing factors, however, important issues must be resolved before the manuscript can be ready for publication. The first concerns the concept of dangerousness and susceptibility, which is strongly confused in the article. Other points can be found in the attached pdf file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Authors replied seriously to all comments and suggestions, the ms had been highly improved in this current form I believe it acceptable for publication.
Minor editing.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Line 73: missing reference (?)
Lines 95 to 102: somewhat repetitive. Sentences could be joined to reduce redundancy. Add references also for the sentence "...methods only use the rainfall as a trigger factor, without fully consider multiple factors" as you have used for spatial variability
Line 283: Table 3 instead of Table 2
The table could be divided in two column, one for the advantages and one for the disadvantages
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
