Spatiotemporal Characteristics and Factors Influencing the Cycling Behavior of Shared Electric Bike Use in Urban Plateau Regions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors present the interesting study about Spatiotemporal characteristics and factors influencing the cycling behavior of shared mopeds in urban plateau regions.

 

Here are my comments:

 

First, please fix the article's name. The cycling behaviour is not appropriate if you are dealing with shared mopeds.

 

It is important to clarify what type of vehicle it is. Is it a moped that moves on its own without the user's assistance? If so, the term 'cycle moped' is not appropriate.

Cycling means using your own energy to bicycle. I assume the mopeds are powered by their own engines.

Please also consider the term electric scooter.

 

Can you please explain if mopeds/scooters are electrically powered? Please explain it in line 37,in the sentence?.... Kunming introduced an electric shared moped

 

The article does not clearly state what factors and values were used, e.g., for transport accessibility and land use factors. Please explain them.

 

line 305: You are writing about the electric scooters. Do you mean the moped? please unify the term for mopeds.

Need to explain individual factors and their values better. I recommend making an explanatory table describing the influencing factors.

In the discussion, please indicate whether shared mopeds and bikesharing compete for customers, or which customers prefer more mopeds than bikes and vice versa.

There are a number of uncertainties in the study that could be explained in more detail.

 

Other notes: 

• Text, figures and tables are printed on top of each other. Leave space, line in between

• Table 6 is a bit cluttered, make it legible

• shared moped cycling = shared moped usage, travelling

• make proofreading again

• edit the References according to the template

 

Author Response

Comments 1: Questions about vehicle type names.

Response 1: The type of vehicle used in this article is an electric bike that can be ridden. After consideration, it is considered more appropriate to use the term shared electric bike in this article. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 2: The article does not clearly state what factors and values were used.

Response 2: The influencing factors studied in this article are mainly the data in Table 2, and their specific parameters have been shown.

 

Comments 3: In the discussion, please indicate whether shared mopeds and bikesharing compete for customers, or which customers prefer more mopeds than bikes and vice versa.

Response 3: In the discussion of this article, I have added a discussion about Shared electric bike and shared bicycles. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 4: Questions about format etc.

Response 4: Related format issues have been optimized. Thank you for pointing this out.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors gathered data about the usage of shared moped in a city of China. The information was analyzed to identify mobility patrons in the city. The results and data-driven authors’ suggestion useful for decision-makers to improve the public policies in this sustainable mean of transport.

 

I think that the authors can improve their work considering the following comments:

 

The abstract mention Kunming at the beginning as if it is a well-known place. Please be more specific telling the reader if it is a place/city/area an in which country.

 

Tables must respect text width

Line 106, what are items?

Line 145. What is a netCDF? Do not use acronyms without defining them in the text.

Line 160 what is a moped OD? Explain it in the text.

Line 161. Please add a reference for Getis Order * method

I fail to fully understand section 3.2. Please make a large effort to explain it better. May be adding some examples for the techniques that you use.

Do not split Table 1, look for another way of presenting the information

Line 358 “to selected” -> “to select”

Line 419. The two dots are unnecessary.

It would be nice to discuss if you can use the information to build a origin-destination matrix with the data you collected. I know that you should integrate your data with other databases but at least present a brief discussion of this to enhance the utility of your work.

Table 5 needs revision. It is too long and there are many unnecessary split words that make it difficult to understand the information.

Add some numeric results to your conclusion to strengthen your conclusions and support your arguments with data.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English quality is good.

Author Response

Comments 1: The abstract mention Kunming at the beginning as if it is a well-known place. Please be more specific telling the reader if it is a place/city/area an in which country.

Response 1: Among the latest submitted papers, I have provided a more detailed description of the location. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 2: what are items?

Response 2: The term "items" in this section refers to the quantity of data information, which includes 9706320 pieces of relevant information about the starting and ending points of bicycles. After careful consideration, it would be more appropriate to use the term data information here. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 3: What is a netCDF? what is a moped OD?

Response 3: This article now provides an explanation for the first occurrence of abbreviated nouns. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 4: Please add a reference for Getis Order * method.

Response 4: Among the latest submitted papers, I have added relevant references. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 5: About Chapter 3.2.

Response 5: Among the latest submitted papers, I have explained the relevant content in depth. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 6: Do not split Table 1, look for another way of presenting the information; Line 358 “to selected” -> “to select”; Line 419. The two dots are unnecessary.

Response 6: Relevant content has been modified. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 7: It would be nice to discuss if you can use the information to build a origin-destination matrix with the data you collected.

Response 7: Among the latest submitted papers, I discuss the content of the origin-destination matrix in more relevant reference papers. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 8: Table 5 needs revision. It is too long and there are many unnecessary split words that make it difficult to understand the information.

Response 8: Related format issues have been optimized. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 9: Add some numeric results to your conclusion to strengthen your conclusions and support your arguments with data.

Response 9: I have added some numerical results in the conclusion. Thank you for pointing this out.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper employs spatiotemporal hotspot analysis, taking Kunming as a case study, to investigate the usage patterns of shared electric mopeds in plateau cities, and attempts to reveal the key factors influencing their spatiotemporal distribution. It analyzes the interplay between factors and visualizes the trends of spatiotemporal changes using cold and hot spot maps, unearthing the distribution pattern of the spatiotemporal characteristics of shared light mopeds. There are some problems, which must be solved before it is considered for publication.

 

Firstly, the paper utilizes the spatiotemporal cube model and the geographical detector method, which are advanced for the analysis of spatiotemporal data. However, it is necessary to ensure that these methods are suitable for the characteristics of the data and the research questions of this study. Based on this, the authors should provide a detailed explanation of the rationale and advantages of the chosen algorithms, as well as their cutting-edge nature in existing research. Moreover, the algorithms do not provide sufficient methodological details, such as model parameter selection and procedural steps of the algorithms.

 

Secondly, while the figures and tables in the paper are necessary for presenting the research findings, their clarity and accuracy must be ensured. For instance, the impact factors and classifications in Table 2 are explained in a lengthy paragraph, and it is suggested that the classifications of factors be directly displayed within the table.

 

Thirdly, in the analysis of results, the authors have employed the Mann-Kendall statistical method and the Getis-Ord method, which are common in hotspot analysis. However, the authors need to discuss the limitations of these methods and their potential impact on the research conclusions. Furthermore, the authors need to provide more details to support the conclusions, especially regarding how different factors interactively affect the usage patterns of shared electric mopeds.

 

Lastly, the overall writing quality of the paper is acceptable, but it may require further linguistic refinement to ensure fluency and professionalism. The structure of the paper is clear and logically strong, but the authors are advised to check whether the transitions between each section are natural to enhance the overall coherence of the paper.

 

Overall, this is a relatively new field of research with a certain degree of originality. This study is of significant importance for understanding the operational patterns of shared electric mopeds within specific geographical and social contexts.

Author Response

Comments 1: It is necessary to ensure that these methods are suitable for the characteristics of the data and the research questions of this study.

Response 1: Among the latest submitted papers, I have added the advantages, cutting-edge nature and basic parameter selection of the space-time cube model and the geodetector method in the article. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 2: While the figures and tables in the paper are necessary for presenting the research findings, their clarity and accuracy must be ensured.

Response 2: Among the latest submitted papers, The relevant categories of impact factors in the latest submitted papers are reflected in the table, thank you for your correction. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 3: The authors need to discuss the limitations of these methods and their potential impact on the research conclusions. Furthermore, the authors need to provide more details to support the conclusions.

Response 3: Among the latest submitted papers, I have added the limitations of the Mann-Kendall statistical method and the Getis-Ord method and related processing methods in the article. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

Comments 4: The overall writing quality of the paper is acceptable, but it may require further linguistic refinement to ensure fluency and professionalism.

Response 4: Among the latest submitted papers, the overall coherence of the paper has now been improved. Thank you for pointing this out.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for the efforts of responding my comments. You have addressed my concerns to a satisfactory level.