Spatial Identification and Interactive Analysis of Urban Production—Living—Ecological Spaces Using Point of Interest Data and a Two-Level Scoring Evaluation Model

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Overview and recommendation：

In this paper, the author constructs a two-step evaluation model by introducing the physical area and density of POI, and based on this, the production-living-ecological space is identified. At the same time, their spatiotemporal evolution and interaction are also analyzed. The results have certain theoretical contributions to improving the recognition accuracy of the three-dimensional space. The results have certain theoretical contributions to improving the recognition accuracy of the production-living-ecological space. However, I found that there are still some problems in the article, and some of them involve the key innovation points. Therefore, I recommend major revisions. I listed the comments in detail below, hoping these could help improve the manuscript.

Major comments:

1. The core innovation is to consider both the physics and density of POIs when identifying the production-living-ecological spaces. However, I did not find the exact definition of the physical area of POI and how the author identifies it. At the same time, the corresponding references given by the author do not seem to give valid answers. Therefore, I hope the author can give further clarification on the physical area of POI.

2. Line 272. In the introduction, the author said that the use of land use cannot accurately identify the production-living-ecological in the main urban area of the city, so what is the rationality of using land use data for accuracy verification here?

Minor comments:

3. This is a publication for international readers. Relevant readers may not care about the detailed spatial pattern of production-living-ecological spaces in the main urban area of Hangzhou. Therefore, I recommend the authors to further refine the abstract.

4. The current keyword content is reasonable, but the order is not appropriate. I suggest the following order to highlight the main work of the article.

“Production-living-ecological spaces; Two-level scoring evaluation model; POI data; Interactive relationship; Hangzhou city”

5. Line 46-47. Please use semicolons consistently.

6. Line 134. It might be better to remove “an”.

7. Line 109-113. Same as comment 3. The research objectives expressed by the authors are somewhat limited, reducing the value of this article. I suggest that the authors rewrite the research objectives with the following logic. Hangzhou is a good area to study these problems, so the author chooses it here, and proposes new identification methods, which can provide references for similar areas.

8. Line 143. It might be better to label the latitude and longitude. At the same time, in the two small pictures on the left, the city of Hangzhou and the main urban areas are marked in red, and it is recommended to use two different colors.

9. Line 166. “relationshiops” should be “relationships”

10. Line 167. “ecologcial” should be “ecological”

11. Line 214. Why is it divided into 300×300 m and 500×500 m grid cells and not some other value?

12. Line 301. “exological” should be “ecological”

13. Line 311. “prodction” should be “production”

14. Line 373. “southwestwen” should be “southwestern”

15. Line 431. It might be better to remove “was”.

16. Line 447. “porket park?” I guess it might be pocket park.

17. Line 450. It might be better to remove “but”.

18. Line 465. “lvel” should be “level”

19. Line 338. It might be better to replace “was” with “be”.

20. Line 480. “prodution” should be “production”

21. Line 486. It might be better to remove “a”.

22. Line 519,520,555,612. Missing "." after the journal name.

 

23. Please standardize the reference format. To give a few examples. (1) Some journal titles are italicized and some are not. (2) Some use [J] and some do not. (3) Some use semicolons to separate authors, and some use commas. (4) Line 624. Corresponding authors are marked with an additional “*”.

Author Response

Point 1: In this paper, the author constructs a two-step evaluation model by introducing the physical area and density of POI, and based on this, the production-living-ecological space is identified. At the same time, their spatiotemporal evolution and interaction are also analyzed. The results have certain theoretical contributions to improving the recognition accuracy of the three-dimensional space. The results have certain theoretical contributions to improving the recognition accuracy of the production-living-ecological space. However, I found that there are still some problems in the article, and some of them involve the key innovation points. Therefore, I recommend major revisions. I listed the comments in detail below, hoping these could help improve the manuscript.

Major comments:

1. The core innovation is to consider both the physics and density of POIs when identifying the production-living-ecological spaces. However, I did not find the exact definition of the physical area of POI and how the author identifies it. At the same time, the corresponding references given by the author do not seem to give valid answers. Therefore, I hope the author can give further clarification on the physical area of POI.

Response 1: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have defined the physical area of POI, which refers to the area occupied by the POI building entity. Meanwhile, we have expounded the detailed steps and process of obtaining the physical area of POIs. Additionally, we also have added relevent references as well as POI physical area results. Please see line 192-199, and Table 2.

Point 2: 2. Line 272. In the introduction, the author said that the use of land use cannot accurately identify the production-living-ecological in the main urban area of the city, so what is the rationality of using land use data for accuracy verification here?

Response 2: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised the presentation. Land use data can be divided into production-living-ecological land, but it fails to evaluate the levels of production-living-ecological functions (Zhu et al., 2022). Meanwhile, we have added the sources of land use planning data. Please see line 77-79, line 156-159.

Minor comments:

Point 3: This is a publication for international readers. Relevant readers may not care about the detailed spatial pattern of production-living-ecological spaces in the main urban area of Hangzhou. Therefore, I recommend the authors to further refine the abstract.

Response 3: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised the Abstract to strengthen the contribution and significance of this paper to research related to rapidly urbanizing cities. Please see line 43-47.

Point 4: The current keyword content is reasonable, but the order is not appropriate. I suggest the following order to highlight the main work of the article.

“Production-living-ecological spaces; Two-level scoring evaluation model; POI data; Interactive relationship; Hangzhou city”

Response 4: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised the order of the keywords. Please see line 48-49.

Point 5: Line 46-47. Please use semicolons consistently.

Response 5: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have use semicolons consistently. Please see line 48-49.

Point 6: Line 134. It might be better to remove “an”.

Response 6: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have use semicolons consistently. Please see line 139.

Point 7: Line 109-113. Same as comment 3. The research objectives expressed by the authors are somewhat limited, reducing the value of this article. I suggest that the authors rewrite the research objectives with the following logic. Hangzhou is a good area to study these problems, so the author chooses it here, and proposes new identification methods, which can provide references for similar areas.

Response 7: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have rewrited the research objectives with the following logic: “Hangzhou is an ideal case area for identifying urban production-living-ecological spaces and their interactive relationships, which can provide references and basis for other rapidly urbanizing cities “. please see line 115-118.

Point 8: Line 143. It might be better to label the latitude and longitude. At the same time, in the two small pictures on the left, the city of Hangzhou and the main urban areas are marked in red, and it is recommended to use two different colors.

Response 8: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised the map of the study area. Please see line Figure 1.

Point 9: Line 166. “relationshiops” should be “relationships”

Response 9: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error. Please see line 174.

Point 10: Line 167. “ecologcial” should be “ecological”

Response 10: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error. Please see line 175.

Point 11: Line 214. Why is it divided into 300×300 m and 500×500 m grid cells and not some other value?

Response 11: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have added the related reason. “According to the related literature on Chinese cities and the measurement of Hangzhou map, the length of the streets in southern China is between 300-1000 meters [43-44]”. Therefore, we chose the 300×300 m and 500×500 m grid cells to find the best scale. Please see line 224-226.

Point 12: Line 301. “exological” should be “ecological”

Response 12: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error. Please see line 318.

Point 13: Line 311. “prodction” should be “production”

Response 13: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error. Please see line 327.

Point 14: Line 373. “southwestwen” should be “southwestern”

Response 14: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error. Please see line 391.

Point 15: Line 431. It might be better to remove “was”.

Response 15: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have removed this word. Please see line 441.

Point 16: Line 447. “porket park?” I guess it might be pocket park.

Response 16: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error. Please see line 468.

Point 17: Line 450. It might be better to remove “but”.

Response 17: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have removed this word. Please see line 471.

Point 18: Line 465. “lvel” should be “level”

Response 18: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error. Please see line 487.

Point 19: Line 338. It might be better to replace “was” with “be”.

Response 19: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error. Please see line 493.

Point 20: Line 480. “prodution” should be “production”

Response 20: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error. Please see line 503.

Point 21: Line 486. It might be better to remove “a”.

Response 21: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this spilling error.

Point 22: Line 519,520,555,612. Missing "." after the journal name.

Response 22: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have added this punctuation.

Point 23: Please standardize the reference format. To give a few examples. (1) Some journal titles are italicized and some are not. (2) Some use [J] and some do not. (3) Some use semicolons to separate authors, and some use commas. (4) Line 624. Corresponding authors are marked with an additional “*”.

Response 23: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised the references. Please see the References.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript is well organized and the drawn conclusions are coherent with the obtained results. The references should be updated to include more recent studies. This study accurately identified the spatial patterns of urban production-living-ecological spaces and their interactive relationships using POI data, which can provide detailed information for urban spatial planning and management.

Lines 46 - 47: To arrange the key-words alphabetically.

Line 86: It is “Point Of Interest”.

Lines 173 – 174: I think that you should add this important reference as example to support your sentence “which can analyze the correlation and density expansion between elements [41-42].”. I would like to suggest:

Bosso, L., et al. 2022. The rise and fall of an alien: why the successful colonizer Littorina saxatilis failed to invade the Mediterranean Sea. Biological Invasions 24, 3169–3187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-022-02838-y

Lines 393 – 395: I think that you should add this important reference as example to support your sentence “With the continuous expansion of global cities and the increasing shortage of resources, optimizing the urban spatial pattern to achieve sustainable development has been come one of the biggest challenges in this century”. I would like to suggest:

 

Smeraldo, S., et al. (2020). Modelling risks posed by wind turbines and power lines to soaring birds: The black stork (Ciconia nigra) in Italy as a case study. Biodiversity and Conservation, 29(6), 1959-1976.

Author Response

This manuscript is well organized and the drawn conclusions are coherent with the obtained results. The references should be updated to include more recent studies. This study accurately identified the spatial patterns of urban production-living-ecological spaces and their interactive relationships using POI data, which can provide detailed information for urban spatial planning and management.

 

Point 1: Lines 46 - 47: To arrange the key-words alphabetically.

Response 1: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised the order of the key-words. Please see line 48-49.

Point 2: Line 86: It is “Point Of Interest”.

Response 2: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have revised this word. Please see line 88.

Point 3:Lines 173 – 174: I think that you should add this important reference as example to support your sentence “which can analyze the correlation and density expansion between elements [41-42].”. I would like to suggest:

Bosso, L., et al. 2022. The rise and fall of an alien: why the successful colonizer Littorina saxatilis failed to invade the Mediterranean Sea. Biological Invasions 24, 3169–3187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-022-02838-y

Response 3: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have added this reference. Please see the References.

Point 3: Lines 393 – 395: I think that you should add this important reference as example to support your sentence “With the continuous expansion of global cities and the increasing shortage of resources, optimizing the urban spatial pattern to achieve sustainable development has been come one of the biggest challenges in this century”. I would like to suggest:

Smeraldo, S., et al. (2020). Modelling risks posed by wind turbines and power lines to soaring birds: The black stork (Ciconia nigra) in Italy as a case study. Biodiversity and Conservation, 29(6), 1959-1976.

Response 4: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have added this reference. Please see the References.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The author's revision addresses my concerns and is recommended for publication in its current form.