Analysis of Mixing Patterns of River Confluences through 3D Spatial Interpolation of Sensor Measurement Data

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript presents a 3D spatial interpolation method to analyze river data. The paper is easy to read and follow. The structure is well organized. The results are thoroughly presented. In my opinion, it is already a well-established work. Only several minor points the authors need to address.

Line 147: The map needs to be improved. Please use a boundary layer in the map/minimap of figure a. It is hard to locate the area on the current map. The caption is incomplete. Please add description for each subcaption.

Line 149: The description of the methodology adopted in this study is quite general. I suggest adding a figure in this section to demonstrate the research flow of this paper. Also, the principle behind each step needs to be explained. 

Line 215: Is there any difference between an and b? I did not see any citation for this figure in the paper.

Line 217: No citation too. Please check all figures and tables throughout the paper.

Line 234: Same as above.

Line 241: What do the different colors of the data mean in this result? Please add a legend.

Line 253: Same as above. Please add the legend in all figures.

Line 368: In the conclusion, I would also like to see a brief discussion about how to reuse the proposed method for other use cases. 

Author Response

We deeply appreciate the valuable comments and useful suggestions from the reviewers. We revised our manuscript based on the comments from the reviewer as follows. Also, we would like to briefly respond to all comments. We hope all these corrections and revisions will be satisfactory.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript presents a methodology for obtaining interpolated values in the three dimensions. This is a very interesting procedure which can have practical utility both in research and in organizational management applications. The manuscript was written very clearly and legibly and the authors accompany the reader in understanding the context and needs. The results were presented in a very complete way and with many details.

I have only a few notes to recommend:

- Figures 3 and 4 have a low resolution, it would be better to insert one with a better graphic resolution and more readable.

- Furthermore, in the graphs of figures 3 and 4 it would be better to replace True Conductivity with Measured Conductivity.

- Finally, in figure 15, 16, 17 and 19, it would be better to substitute the word "Distance" instead of the word "Distance".

For all the rest, I congratulate the authors for the excellent work they have done and I wish them to continue with these interesting and useful research activities.

Author Response

We deeply appreciate the valuable comments and useful suggestions from the reviewers. We revised our manuscript based on the comments from the reviewer as follows. Also, we would like to briefly respond to all comments. We hope all these corrections and revisions will be satisfactory.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx