Evolution and Prediction of Urban Fringe Areas Based on Logistic–CA–Markov Models: The Case of Wuhan City

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have no issues with the manuscript. Can be accepted as such

Author Response

Dear Professor Reviewer，

It is a great honor to receive your recognition for this work. On behalf of all the contributing authors, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to you for your review.

Thank you again for your professional and conscientious suggestion to our manuscript. Hopefully we have addressed all your concerns.

Very sincerely yours

 

Yan Long  

2023-9-8

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper aims to delineate the scope of urban fringe areas, investigate their dynamic evolution processes, driving forces, and offer predictions for the future. Overall, the author's insights into identifying urban fringe areas, their transformation dynamics among urban core, rural hinterlands, and the comparison of predicted urban growth with urban planning are valuable. The index and model descriptions are relatively clear. The results illuminate potential paths for urban policy implementation. Nevertheless, there are several suggestions to enhance readability and the overall impact of the paper.

In the second paragraph, the author refers to Western scholars' theories and Eastern scholars' theories. To provide clarity, it would be beneficial for the author to specify which theory from Eastern scholars is being discussed. Generally, it is advisable to include the summarizing sentence at the beginning of each paragraph to outline its content. The same suggestion applies to lines 73 and 88.

In line 88, the assertion that the Logistic-CA-Markov model's accuracy in predicting land use evolution is dependable needs substantiation. The author should not just list land use simulation papers but also provide a concise overview of the strengths and limitations of commonly used models. Additionally, the comparative traits of the mentioned simulation models should be summarized.

Referring to line 139, the author mentions 'transfer matrix of urban spatial structure' and 'transfer matrix of urban spatial structure type.' Given that Figure 1 presents 'urban spatial transition matrix' and 'urban regional spatial structure transition matrix,' the relationship between these expressions should be clarified.

In section 2.3, the author repeatedly underscores the inability of the CA model to address spatial heterogeneity. However, there's a need to elaborate on how the Logistic CA Markov model handles spatial heterogeneity within the complex context of urban fringe land use types.

The explanations of the various predictive methods lack coherence and logic in establishing why the Logistic CA Markov model is the suitable choice.

In line 356, the term 'accidental factors' needs elaboration.

In line 365, the instruction 'Using a 1° angle, draw 360 radii from this center' might not be accurate; 'radii' might not be the correct term. Considering Figure 3, it appears that the sample point is where radial lines intersect with concentric circles. The section describing the design of sampling points needs rephrasing for clarity.

Throughout the manuscript, various terms are used to denote change points (e.g., mutation point, sudden change point, abrupt point). The author should clarify the distinctions among these terms or choose one term for consistency throughout the text.

In line 416, the calculation method for correction coefficients should be explained.

In line 559, when discussing predicting results and planning maps, the author should differentiate between the predicting result and the Logistic CA Markov model prediction result.

Every table and figure should be explained in the text. Please provide an explanation for Figure 4's significance.

In line 655, explanation sentences about phenomena should be moved to the discussion section; the results section should focus on presenting the outcomes.

The discrepancy between the two sub-maps in Figure 10, both representing the 2020 urban fringe forecast, requires clarification. Ensure consistency in scale and north arrow between these sub-maps.

In line 823, specify the types of remote sensing data employed.

The paper lacks an explanation of the input data for the prediction model. The result section contains extensive discussions that should be relocated to supplementary materials. The content related to models and methods should be shifted to the method section.

The author suggested that insights from studying Wuhan City's urban fringe could extend to similar cities' sustainable urban development. However, this claim lacks elaboration and needs to be addressed in the concluding section.

Limitations of the work and potential future plans should be added to the discussion section.

Minor issues:

·       In line 15, revise to 'The results show that the transformation of rural hinterlands into urban fringe is significantly affected by the distance from railway stations, highways, commercial centers, and urban main roads.'

·       Clarify the Eastern scholars' theory mentioned in the second paragraph. Begin each paragraph with a summarizing sentence (lines 73, 88).

·       In line 91, change 'think' to 'thought'. Use past tense in the literature review. Same correction for line 94.

·       In line 95, avoid repeating the words 'simulate' and 'predict'.

·       Clarify the reference to 'this method' in line 97.

·       Ensure consistent usage of terms like 'slide T-test' and 'moving T-test'.

·       Correct words like 'government', 'model', and 'impervious' in Figure 1. Provide the full name of the abbreviation 'Matalab' when first mentioned.

·       Use formula tools to format equations in italics and cite equation symbols in the text.

·       In line 196, eliminate repetition in mentioning the population density data from WorldPop.

·       Rectify the wording in line 229 concerning the equation.

·       Change 'Combination' to lowercase in line 243.

·       Revise to 'Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) index' in line 265.

·       Ensure consistency in subtitle positions (line 267).

·       Specify abbreviations in the beginning if used later in the text (line 271).

·       Provide complete sentences to explain equation symbols (lines 277, 293).

·       Change 'multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) model' in line 310.

·       In Figure 2, remove either the north arrow or the lines of latitude and longitude. Add the missing elements for the maps on the left side and enlarge the figure for better legibility.

·       Correct semicolons and capitalization in section 3.2.

·       Ensure consistent expression of the 'impervious surface ratio'.

·       Standardize expression of 'landscape flocculation index' in section 4.1.2.

·       Eliminate repetition in the first two sentences of section 4.2.3.

·       Rephrase lines 757 and 762 for originality.

·       Standardize 'dynamic degree' and 'dynamic attitude'.

See attached.

Author Response

Dear Professor Reviewer，

We would like to thank you and reviewers for the thoughtful comments, many of which have been incorporated into the revised manuscript. Since the content of the new manuscript has been greatly revised, the positioning of the line in the old manuscript for your question has changed greatly. Therefore, for the convenience of viewing and comparison, for all the revisions we will use "chapter number" or "section number" to locate, we sincerely wish for your understanding. Follow word are our responses to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1 The introduction section includes references to various researchers' work, but it lacks a brief summary to guide readers through the study's context.

2 Figure 1 needs a clear explanation in the paper about how the Logistic, CA, and Markov models are combined. Explain in detail how these models work together and how data used and changed in these models.

3 Please provide a clearer and more detailed explanation for the process described in lines 365-366: "Using a 1° angle, draw 360 radii from this center. At the same time, create 180 concentric circles with a 500-meter interval along each radius, forming a circular radial grid that covers the entire study area."

4  in China, basic farmland can't be changed to other land uses. While you discuss changes in the urban fringe, consider if your findings align with this reality.

5 Please revise Figure 13(b) to clearly show the difference between "Wuhan Urban Fringe Area Forecast for 2035 Compared" and the "Wuhan City Territorial Spatial Plan in 2021-2035."

6 The precision of Urban Fringe Area prediction should be added.

The authors  are overusing possessive pronouns.

Author Response

Dear Professor Reviewer，

We would like to thank you and reviewers for the thoughtful comments, many of which have been incorporated into the revised manuscript. Since the content of the new manuscript has been greatly revised, the positioning of the lines in the old manuscript for your question has changed greatly. Therefore, for the convenience of viewing and comparison, for all the revisions we will use "chapter number" or "section number" to locate, we sincerely wish for your understanding. Follow word are our responses to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The quality of the paper has significantly improved! In response to the review comments, I noticed that the line numbers don't match, and some revisions in the manuscript are not highlighted or tracked. However, I was able to locate all the revisions.

Overall, the authors have satisfactorily addressed all of my comments. I have a few minor comments regarding the structure of the abstract and literature review.

Abstract:

(1) The first sentence should establish the overarching research area and highlight current research gaps.

(2) Research questions should be clearly stated in the abstract.

(3) The last sentence should appeal to a broader readership beyond the specific study area.

Literature review: Some recent articles focusing on China should be mentioned in section 2.1.

Pending the resolution of these minor issues, I recommend the publication of the paper.

-

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We would like to express our gratitude for reviewing our manuscript once again, and we apologize for the issues regarding the mismatched line numbers that you pointed out. We have provided a PDF file, and we will refer to the line numbers in the response letter according to the PDF file. We will address these problems in our upcoming revisions.

(1) The first sentence should establish the overarching research area and highlight current research gaps.

(2) Research questions should be clearly stated in the abstract.

(3) The last sentence should appeal to a broader readership beyond the specific study area.

Response to reviewer's comments: Based on your feedback regarding the abstract, we have made revisions to the abstract, specifically in lines 11-29 of the manuscript. The revised abstract is as follows:

Urban fringe is the transitional area from rural form to urban form, and it is also the urban space reserve land in Territorial Spatial Plan. However, few researchers predict its overall evolution and guide the implementation of Territorial Spatial Plan. This study attempts to explore the dynamic evolution law of urban fringe, analyze its driving factors, predict its future development, and put forward management suggestions for the implementation of Territorial Spatial Plan. In this paper, the land use data of Wuhan in 2000, 2010 and 2020 are applied to delimit the urban fringe area of Wuhan by means of sliding t-test. Fifteen driving factors are selected from three dimensions: natural factors, socio-economic factors and traffic accessibility, and brought into Logistic model to explore the driving factors of its spatial evolution, and CA-Markov model is used to predict the fringe area of Wuhan in 2035. The results show that the transformation of rural hinterland into urban fringe is obviously affected by the distance from railway stations, highways, commercial centers and urban main roads. It is predicted that the outer boundary of Wuhan's fringe area in 2035 is basically the same as the planned urban development boundary. In order to realize the intention of land space planning, the development and construction of the northwest of Huangpi District, the East Lake Scenic Area and the west side of Jiangxia District should be restricted. From the perspective of the evolution of the fringe area, this paper puts forward some management suggestions for the implementation of the Territorial Spatial Plan, and makes a beneficial attempt in theory and method to understand the development characteristics of the fringe area and promote the implementation of the Territorial Spatial Plan.

（4）Literature review: Some recent articles focusing on China should be mentioned in section 2.1.

Response to reviewer's comments: We have added some Chinese references in the literature review section, specifically in lines 99-105 of the manuscript. The specific references are numbered 14 and 15. The following is the added reference content:

Fan et al. describe and define the spatial extent of the semi-urbanized areas in Hangzhou City by calculating "land fragmentation" and "proportion of arable land" using land use coverage data. Yang et al. delineated the urban fringe range of Jiangyin City and Zhangjiagang City using a new method comprised of three main parts: comprehensive urbanization index, mutation point detection, and constraint-based boundary recognition. The feasibility of the new method was determined through comparative analysis of the results obtained under different constraint conditions.

Thank you again for your professional and conscientious suggestion to our manuscript. Hopefully we have addressed all your concerns.

 Very sincerely yours

 Yan Long  

2023-9-25

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx