Next Article in Journal
Mapping of Greenhouse Gas Concentration in Peninsular Malaysia Industrial Areas Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicle-Based Sniffer Sensor
Next Article in Special Issue
A Potential Earthquake with Magnitude Mw 7.2 on the Northern Xiaojiang Fault Revealed by GNSS Measurement
Previous Article in Journal
Comparison of GRACE/GRACE-FO Spherical Harmonic and Mascon Products in Interpreting GNSS Vertical Loading Deformations over the Amazon Basin
Previous Article in Special Issue
An Improved Source Model of the 2021 Mw 6.1 Yangbi Earthquake (Southwest China) Based on InSAR and BOI Datasets
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Remote Sensing
Volume 15
Issue 1
10.3390/rs15010254
Review Report
remotesensing-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Imaging the Fault Zone Structure of the Pearl River Estuary Fault in Guangzhou, China, from Waveform Inversion with an Active Source and Dense Linear Array

Remote Sens. 2023, 15(1), 254; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15010254
by Xiaona Ma 1,2, Weitao Wang 1,2,*, Shanhui Xu 1,2, Wei Yang 1,2, Yunpeng Zhang 1,2 and Chuanjie Dong 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Nikolay Khokhlov
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(1), 254; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15010254
Submission received: 16 November 2022 / Revised: 21 December 2022 / Accepted: 25 December 2022 / Published: 1 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Role of Remote Sensing in Investigating Fault Zone Properties over Various Spatial-Temporal Scales)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report


Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The work is devoted to the study of fault localization for the purpose of seismic monitoring. The paper discusses the use of acoustic full-wave inversion for such purposes. A study based on real seismic data is presented. The work is undoubtedly relevant and interesting. There are a number of small remarks.

Point 1. Based on the text of the work, an acoustic inversion of the data was carried out. Why was acoustic inversion chosen? Perhaps elastic inversion would be better suited to identify fluid-saturated inclusions?

Point 2. Line 186. What determines the choice of the order of modeling accuracy? What method was used? Classic type FDTD or different?

Point 3. Formula 3 and beyond. Statements from inversion in the frequency domain are given. Why did you change to bold in the field designation? What is the complex conjugation for if the data is in the real area?

Point 4. Formula 1. What do s and g index mean?

Point 5. Formula 4. What does mean \nu?

Point 6. Lines 205-207. What does it apply to? What is a "wavefield residual error"?

Point 7. The general description of the full-wave inversion looks like it was collected from various sources according to fragmentary formulas. There is a general structure, but a holistic reading is difficult. In formula 6, what is h ? Does it match with g?

Point 8. Section 3.2. A description of a synthetic example for the validation of full wave inversion is given. What calculation parameters were used? Time steps, discretization steps? What is the source frequency based on? Line 248 is about frequencies. Was the inversion in the frequency or time domain? How was frequency limiting done in the time domain?

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you. Notes have been corrected.

Back to TopTop