A Fuzzy–AHP Model for Quantifying Authenticity Loss in Adaptive Reuse: A Sustainable Heritage Approach Based on Traditional Houses in Alanya
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
This article presents a timely and methodologically rigorous approach to quantifying authenticity loss in adaptive reuse projects, a critical challenge at the nexus of heritage conservation and sustainability. The application of Fuzzy Logic and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to operationalise abstract concepts is commendable and provides a powerful, reproducible tool. The findings are of significant practical and theoretical importance.
My observations are as follows:
1. The Abstract should more explicitly articulate *how* the quantitative method addresses a specific, persistent problem within the sustainability discourse.
2. Since the fuzzy logic and AHP have been implemented in this research. The authors should provide the details pertinent to the fuzzy linguistic variables and mathematical model in the Methodology section.
3. The paper's theoretical strength lies in its claim that the two authenticity groups correlate to different aspects of sustainability. his linkage should be formalised within the Methodology section.
4. The conclusive finding regarding the discrepancy between high Group 1 scores (material preservation) and low Group 2 scores (intangible loss) is excellent but could be sharpened to deliver a clearer policy implication.
The research provides an innovative and academically significant contribution by providing a quantitative framework for measuring authenticity in adaptive reuse. Addressing the these points detailed above will significantly enhance the paper's methodological rigour and theoretical impact within the field of sustainable heritage.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear Author,
Your article has been thoroughly reviewed, taking into consideration both the methodological aspects and the coherence between the results and the conclusions presented. The analysis was carried out based on the full content of the manuscript, and a document has been prepared with specific observations aimed at strengthening the scientific clarity, methodological structure, and validity of the results.
A PDF file is attached containing the detailed comments and suggestions corresponding to each section of the article.
Sincerely,
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear Author,
Thank you sincerely for the time and effort dedicated to addressing the observations provided in the first round of review. I have carefully analyzed the modifications made to the manuscript and positively acknowledge the incorporation of the methodological, structural, and conceptual adjustments that were requested.
As part of this review stage, I am attaching a PDF file containing minor corrections and specific comments aimed at further strengthening the clarity, coherence, and scientific precision of the manuscript.
Sincerely
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
