Statistical Modeling of Water Shortage in Water Distribution Systems in Guangzhou
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for providing the opportunity to review this manuscript which focused on using a heat map to analyze the distribution of water shortage records for a particular Chinese city with the goal of establishing a relationship between probability of customer complaints and water supply pressure. A model for water supply distribution was developed. Overall, I felt the manuscript was well written, the study well designed and of apparent value to the water supply industry in the studied city. The presented work was specific to the region, highly specialized, and I wonder how applicable it is to this journal. It appears this type of manuscript would be best for an applied hydraulics journal that focused on civil works or even water system hydro informatics, not a journal that publishes work on a broad range of water-related issues. This is highly specialized modeling work that is tailored to one specific system/ city, so more details are needed in the methods section, particularly if the authors desire a reasonable level of readership. It appears this manuscript was only written for a very specific group of readers and does not appear to have broad value.
Specific points:
Abstract: What is meant by “the model conforms to an artificial neural function”? It’s statements like these that need more general description if the authors desire a broader review from the public.
In title mention the city or region where the work was completed as this type of work is not applicable to all regions and cases
Page 1, Line 14: Say “For many areas water supply systems can be divided into….”
Page 2, Lines 52-70: I’m not sure I understand the point by listing all these studies. I don’t see the connections. It just appears to be a list of seemingly related research studies.
Figure 2: What are all these zones? Provide more explanation in the figure legend.
Page 5, Lines 140-141: Chinese text is not understood by global readers so either translate or place in a foot note.
Page 5: Mention what programming language was used to develop these algorithms.
Figure 4: Provide description in the legend what the different colors (green, blue) refer to.
Figure 5: Much more explanation is needed on what these types of plots are saying or detailing.
Page 8, Line 218: What is the Ray Method?
Page 13, Line 337: What does the 0.454 refer to, in practical terms?
English language writing was fine. No issues.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your decision and constructive comments on our manuscript!
We have tried our best to improve and made some changes in the manuscript. In the revised manuscript, we have highlighted all the revisions made with the color yellow for easy identification. We have provided an attachment that addresses each of the questions and concerns you raised.
Thank you once again for your time and valuable comments!
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper presents an interesting proposal and has the potential for practical application.
However, the text requires improvement and clarification of some doubts.
1) Make clear the research question and the objectives of the paper.
2) Include references to all methods and equations in section 2.
3) Include a legend about the different colors in all heat maps. They are confused.
4) Give information about the software (or programming language) used for modeling.
5) What was the level of significance used?
5) Avoid overuse of topics in the text. Give fluidity to the manuscript. The writing on topics without alignment with the text makes it difficult to read. Example: Section 2, Section 4 and Section 5.
6) Lines 157 – 177. I suggest improving this text. The population parameters of the two-dimensional Gaussian distribution will be approximated by sample statistics? (1) Is Equation (1)? (2) Is Equation (2)? (3) Is Equation (3)? It's important to make it clear.
7) Equation (5)? Lines 303 - 304
8) Equation 6 an 7 should be in the methods section.
9) Is the sigma of the sigmoid function (Equation 6 and 7; Table 1) the same as the Gaussian distribution? Please revise.
10) Line 339: R² is the coefficient of determination or explanation. The correlation coefficient (r) is dimensionless.
11) Line 350: was the Pearson correlation coefficient calculated?
10) Detail the results of the lines between 340 and 349 with numbers and associate them with the graphics in figure 9.
11) Improve figure 10. Please translate the text in Chinese.
12) Enrich the discussion by confronting it with works in the literature and real possibilities of application.
13) Include research limitations and suggestions for further research.
14) Enhance the wording of the text. There is a lot of repeated information (introduction and method). Examples: please see lines 75 and 78; 92, 96 and 102.
15) There are text in Chinese which makes it difficult to understand the article (lines 140, 141,…)
16) I suggest changing the title. The article is more focused on modeling than statistical characteristics.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your decision and constructive comments on our manuscript!
We have tried our best to improve and made some changes in the manuscript. In the revised manuscript, we have highlighted all the revisions made with the color yellow for easy identification. We have provided an attachment that addresses each of the questions and concerns you raised.
Thank you once again for your time and valuable comments!
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
No further comments. Thank you for the responses.
English writing appears fine.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions highlighted in the re-submitted files.
We extend our heartfelt gratitude for your invaluable contribution to our manuscript. We appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to reviewing our work and providing us with valuable guidance to improve our manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors made significative improvements to the manuscript. However, there is still a need to improve the formalism in mathematical writing. Equations 1, 2 and 3 are not called in the text.
I suggest including the version of the software Origin used.
Finally, the text in the form of topics in the conclusion needs to be aligned with the text.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for investing your valuable time in reviewing our manuscript. We sincerely appreciate your insightful comments and constructive suggestions, which have played a crucial role in improving the quality of our research. We have carefully considered each of your comments and incorporated the necessary revisions into the re-submitted files.
Attached to this response, you will find a detailed document addressing all of the questions and concerns you raised. In addition, the revised sections have been clearly highlighted for your convenience, allowing easy identification of the changes made.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
