Spatial-Temporal Evaluation and Prediction of Water Resources Carrying Capacity in the Xiangjiang River Basin Using County Units and Entropy Weight TOPSIS-BP Neural Network

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper employs the TOPSIS method and entropy weight method to evaluate the water resources carrying capacity of the Xiangjiang River basin. Additionally, a BP neural network is utilized to predict and analyze the water resources carrying capacity level for the next five years. Furthermore, the GIS method is integrated to analyze the temporal and spatial changes. The method of this article is very common, and there are many similar articles on the evaluation of water resources carrying capacity, so I think this article does not have much innovation or value to provide readers.

Line 46: In my opinion, this paragraph lacks sufficient elaboration on the current research situation both domestically and internationally, and fails to summarize the existing problems in the current research.  This does not adequately pave the way for the research presented in your article.  I believe you should first summarize the current problems and then conduct research focused on addressing those issues.  By doing so, readers will be able to more easily discern the value and innovation of your article.

Line 98: If you want to emphasize that innovation is a county research unit, I have read many county research unit articles, how is your article different?

How the laws of the county scale differ from other scales can be compared in your article.

Line 290: Since this article studies a river basin, why do we describe each prefecture-level city separately? Why don't you start with a general introduction?

Line 409: The authors use BP neural networks to make predictions. This model is a black box. Does this prediction make sense?

Line 437: What are the reasons for this phenomenon?

The quality of all the figures in this article is so poor that the text on the map can't be read clearly.

I think this paper should add some discussion, such as discussing the laws of different scales, the causes of these phenomena, and finally, it should have a policy inspiration, and what advice your research can provide to relevant government departments.

Author Response

Reviewer #1:

1. Line 46: In my opinion, this paragraph lacks sufficient elaboration on the current research situation both domestically and internationally, and fails to summarize the existing problems in the current research.  This does not adequately pave the way for the research presented in your article.  I believe you should first summarize the current problems and then conduct research focused on addressing those issues.  By doing so, readers will be able to more easily discern the value and innovation of your article.

A: The introduction section has been rewritten to explain the existing problems in the current research, emphasizing the innovation and practicality of the article.

 

2.Line 98: If you want to emphasize that innovation is a county research unit, I have read many county research unit articles, how is your article different?

How the laws of the county scale differ from other scales can be compared in your article.

A:Comparisons were made between county-level scales and other scales, and a table was created to emphasize the advantages of using county-level units

Evaluating the water resources carrying capacity of the Xiangjiang River Basin at the county level can provide more detailed water resources data, facilitating the identification of specific water resources distribution and demand differences. This detailed evaluation helps local governments formulate more effective water resource management policies, achieve rational allocation and optimized utilization of resources, and thus improve the pertinence and operability of management.

 

3.Line 290: Since this article studies a river basin, why do we describe each prefecture-level city separately? Why don't you start with a general introduction?

A:Added an overall introduction to the watershed. Introducing each prefecture level city is because the situation in each prefecture level city is different, making it easier to describe and analyze the situation in each county, and better reflecting the problems in a region.

 

4.Line 409: The authors use BP neural networks to make predictions. This model is a black box. Does this prediction make sense?

A:BP neural network is a widely used artificial neural network model, which has the advantages of simple structure and strong operability. By adjusting the network structure and parameters, BP neural network can solve most of the problems faced by neural networks, providing an innovative approach and way to enhance the carrying capacity of regional water resources. Therefore, selecting BP neural network as the model for predicting the water resources carrying capacity of the Xiangjiang River Basin, and applying BP neural network to predict the water resources carrying capacity of the Xiangjiang River Basin can provide scientific basis for the construction of smart water network in the region, and provide practical and effective analysis methods for the planning and decision-making of relevant government departments.

 

5.Line 437: What are the reasons for this phenomenon?

A:Based on the predicted results, in-depth analysis shows that the sustained "overload" risk level in the Xiangjiang River Basin may be related to population migration and rapid economic development.

 

6.The quality of all the figures in this article is so poor that the text on the map can't be read clearly.

A:The resolution of the chart has been improved.

 

7.I think this paper should add some discussion, such as discussing the laws of different scales, the causes of these phenomena, and finally, it should have a policy inspiration, and what advice your research can provide to relevant government departments.

A:Added discussion section and provided policy recommendations for various types of regions.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation and prediction of the water resources carrying capacity of the Xiangjiang River Basin in Hunan, China. The authors used 44 county units as evaluation targets and employed advanced methods such as TOPSIS, entropy weighting, and BP neural network model for prediction. The spatial and temporal analyses combined with the GIS method provided valuable details into the stability and variability of the water resources carrying capacity in the region. In general, the manuscript should be acceptable for publication, but some serious problems must be repaired prior to publication. It needs some significant improvement. Some suggestions are as follows:

1. Please follow the journal author instructions. It would be useful for the reader to follow the classical text structure (i.e. Introduction-methodology-results-discussion-conclusions). A better presentation of your results and an extensive discussion would improve your paper.

2. The paper lacks clarity in its presentation, which hinders the understanding of the research methodologies and the implications of the findings. The abstract is ambiguous and fails to effectively summarize the key findings and contributions of the research.

3. The methodology section lacks detailed explanations of the research methods employed, making it challenging to assess the rigor and reproducibility of the study. The paper also fails to discuss the limitations of the research and potential sources of error.

4. The text of the "Introduction" does not sufficiently develop the function of this type of research for this field of knowledge.  The introductory text is wordy and does not present an ideas articulation. The novelty, economic impact and practical applicability of this study should be highlighted more.

5. A proper presentation of the study area is not performed. I strongly recommend that the authors include a location map at the beginning of the "1. Status of the study area" section and move Table 1 to the supplementary materials.

6. The systematization of methodological procedures should be described in more detail. Is this proposal inedited? If so, emphasize the unpublished. If not, cite previous work discussing this method integration.

7. The flowchart of the suggested methodology should be given by more branches and in detail in Figure 3. Thus, the readers can easily follow the application procedures.

8. Basically, we have here only the presentation of the results. There is no more dense discussion about the results obtained and the others relevant to this theme. I suggest that the authors reformulate this item robustly and enrich the literature review with more recently citations and references.

9. Conclusions part can be improved in the paper. Here is presented in a general concept. Is the used methodology in the paper valid for all areas or is there any limitation or classification for the application?

10. I strongly suggest that the authors review all the figures, increasing the resolution quality to ensure proper visibility of the information in the maps, graphs, and their captions. The names of the cities could be replaced with numbers to make their locations more easily identifiable, especially on the maps (the names are too small).

I am available for any clarification.

Kind regards.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language usage should be checked by a fluent English speaker. It is suggested to the authors to take the assistance of someone with English as mother tongue.

Author Response

Reviewer #2:

1. Please follow the journal author instructions. It would be useful for the reader to follow the classical text structure (i.e. Introduction-methodology-results-discussion-conclusions). A better presentation of your results and an extensive discussion would improve your paper.

A:Added discussion section and revised conclusion.

 

2.The paper lacks clarity in its presentation, which hinders the understanding of the research methodologies and the implications of the findings. The abstract is ambiguous and fails to effectively summarize the key findings and contributions of the research.

A:The abstract has been improved and the main contributions have been summarized.

 

3. The methodology section lacks detailed explanations of the research methods employed, making it challenging to assess the rigor and reproducibility of the study. The paper also fails to discuss the limitations of the research and potential sources of error.

A:Provided a detailed explanation of the research methodology.

 

4. The text of the "Introduction" does not sufficiently develop the function of this type of research for this field of knowledge.  The introductory text is wordy and does not present an ideas articulation. The novelty, economic impact and practical applicability of this study should be highlighted more.

A:Revised the introduction to highlight the novelty and practicality of this study.

 

 

5. A proper presentation of the study area is not performed. I strongly recommend that the authors include a location map at the beginning of the "1. Status of the study area" section and move Table 1 to the supplementary materials.

A:Added a current status map of the research area.

 

6. The systematization of methodological procedures should be described in more detail. Is this proposal inedited? If so, emphasize the unpublished. If not, cite previous work discussing this method integration.

A:The references for usage methods and standards have been marked in the text.

 

7. The flowchart of the suggested methodology should be given by more branches and in detail in Figure 3. Thus, the readers can easily follow the application procedures.

A:Added technology roadmap.The original Figure 3 only involves the framework of the criterion layer. In my opinion, adding all the selected indicators would appear lengthy. The detailed content is introduced in the table below.

 

8. Basically, we have here only the presentation of the results. There is no more dense discussion about the results obtained and the others relevant to this theme. I suggest that the authors reformulate this item robustly and enrich the literature review with more recently citations and references.

A:Added discussion section and provided policy recommendations for various types of regions.

 

9. Conclusions part can be improved in the paper. Here is presented in a general concept. Is the used methodology in the paper valid for all areas or is there any limitation or classification for the application?

A:Improved the conclusion and analyzed the applicability of the method in the discussion section.

In practical applications, adjustments and optimizations need to be made according to local conditions. Different basins may face different problems and challenges, such as water resource abundance and scarcity, differences in management capabilities, types of pollution sources, and so on. Therefore, when applied to other watersheds, adjustments may need to be made based on local hydrological conditions, economic and social conditions, and environmental factors.

 

10. I strongly suggest that the authors review all the figures, increasing the resolution quality to ensure proper visibility of the information in the maps, graphs, and their captions. The names of the cities could be replaced with numbers to make their locations more easily identifiable, especially on the maps (the names are too small).

A:The resolution of the chart has been improved，the names of each city are now clearly visible.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Based on the county unit framework, this study evaluates and predicts the water resources carrying capacity of the Xiangjiang River in Hunan, China, using TOPSIS, entropy weighting, and BP neural network models. Findings reveal stable overall capacity with localized overload, spatial disparities favoring northern regions, and projections highlighting critical conditions in Changsha and Zixing City by 2022. In general, the paper is very interesting, and here are some comments:

1-Pls change the title: e.g, "Spatial-Temporal Evaluation and Prediction of Water Resources Carrying Capacity in the Xiangjiang River Basin Using County Units and Machine Learning Models"

2-Add more references to the introduction

3-How does the county unit framework enhance the precision of evaluating and predicting water resources carrying capacity in the Xiangjiang River basin?

4-What are the key factors contributing to the spatial variability in water resources carrying capacity across the Xiangjiang River basin?

5-How do the predictions from the BP neural network model inform future governance and policy measures for water resource management in the region?

6-What implications do the findings have for regions like Changsha and Zixing City, which are predicted to be in critical or overloaded states?

7-Moderate editing of English language required

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required.

Author Response

Reviewer #3:

1.Pls change the title: e.g, "Spatial-Temporal Evaluation and Prediction of Water Resources Carrying Capacity in the Xiangjiang River Basin Using County Units and Machine Learning Models"

A:The title has been revised according to the suggestion.

 

2.Add more references to the introduction

A:The introduction has been revised, and this section has now become more comprehensive.

 

3.How does the county unit framework enhance the precision of evaluating and predicting water resources carrying capacity in the Xiangjiang River basin?

A:Comparisons were made between county-level scales and other scales, and a table was created to emphasize the advantages of using county-level units.

Evaluating the water resources carrying capacity of the Xiangjiang River Basin at the county level can provide more detailed water resources data, facilitating the identification of specific water resources distribution and demand differences. This detailed evaluation helps local governments formulate more effective water resource management policies, achieve rational allocation and optimized utilization of resources, and thus improve the pertinence and operability of management.

 

4.What are the key factors contributing to the spatial variability in water resources carrying capacity across the Xiangjiang River basin?

A:Based on the predicted results, in-depth analysis shows that the sustained "overload" risk level in the Xiangjiang River Basin may be related to population migration and rapid economic development.

 

5.How do the predictions from the BP neural network model inform future governance and policy measures for water resource management in the region?

A:Added a discussion section and proposed policy recommendations for future water resource management in the region.

 

6.What implications do the findings have for regions like Changsha and Zixing City, which are predicted to be in critical or overloaded states?

A:Due to the increase in water resource demand caused by population inflow and economic development, Changsha urgently needs to take measures to optimize water resource allocation to ensure sustainable development in the future; For areas like Zixing City, although temporarily ahead of other regions due to the existence of Dongjiang Reservoir, it is still necessary to pay attention to ecological environment protection to avoid irreversible impacts on the environment caused by excessive resource development.

 

7.Moderate editing of English language required

A:The English of the article has been improved.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks.

Author Response

No specific suggestions for revision have been put forward, thanks for the reviewer's guidance and hard review!

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

You made all the required revisions and qualifically justified my questions. I  recommend that the authors conduct a review and include a scale bar on all maps and ensure that all the legends are visible. I also recommend that the authors enhance the review literature with a more robust discussion and compare more extensively with previous research on this topic. Therefore, my decision is to "minor revision". 

I am available for any clarification.

Kind regards.

Author Response

I have carefully modified it according to the reviewer's comments and guidance. See attached PDF.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am satisfied by the answers provided by the authors. All the comments/suggestions are correctly addressed in the revised version of the manuscript.

Author Response

Thanks for the reviewer's guidance and hard review!