Next Article in Journal
Simulation Study on the Energy Utilization Efficiency of a Turbine Impeller Based on a Selective Laser Melting Process
Next Article in Special Issue
Groundwater Vulnerability Assessment and Protection Strategy in the Coastal Area of China: A GIS-Based DRASTIC Model Approach
Previous Article in Journal
FDTD Method for Electromagnetic Simulations in Media Described by Time-Fractional Constitutive Relations
Previous Article in Special Issue
Suitability Assessment of Multilayer Urban Underground Space Based on Entropy and CRITIC Combined Weighting Method: A Case Study in Xiong’an New Area, China
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Research on Suitability Evaluation of Urban Engineering Construction Based on Entropy Weight Hierarchy-Cloud Model: A Case Study in Xiongan New Area, China

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(19), 10655; https://doi.org/10.3390/app131910655
by Yi-Hang Gao 1,2,3,4, Bo Han 1,2,3,4, Jin-Jie Miao 1,2,3,4, Shuang Jin 5,* and Hong-Wei Liu 1,2,3,4,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(19), 10655; https://doi.org/10.3390/app131910655
Submission received: 3 August 2023 / Revised: 15 September 2023 / Accepted: 20 September 2023 / Published: 25 September 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

the paper  proposes a cloud model for the suitability evaluation of project construction in Xiongan New Area based on  entropy weight analysis. The model uses fuzzy set theory and probability theory to translate between qualitative thoughts and numerical values.  Compared to the conventional evaluation approach, this method may more accurately and comprehensively reflect the evaluation results, providing a fresh perspective on assessing the feasibility of urban engineering projects. The research idea is good and represents an innovation of environmental assessments. However, modifications are recommended to improve paper quality.

Introduction: In the introduction we talk about conventional methods. Which ones are they? What are the limits? What are the differences between the proposed approach and conventional methods? The authors talk about advantages over conventional methods, what are they?it is necessary to analyze in detail the advancement of knowledge.

Case study: The case study is interesting, but what is the contribution of the research presented? Are there any differences compared to applying standard methods? What differences? Can the authors provide the benefits in quantitative terms?

Conclusion: Conclusions need to be improved. it is necessary to indicate the main results obtained

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Editor

I would thank you for the invitation to review the manuscript entitled "Research on Suitability Evaluation of Urban Engineering Construction Based on Entropy Weight Hierarchy-Cloud Model" The present study discussed very important topic; geological conditions, groundwater environment, environmental geological problems and other factors that affect the suitability of urban development in Xiongan New Area in Hebei Province (China) that show an accelerate urbanization process in this recent years. The methodology is well done using one cloud model for the suitability evaluation of project construction based on entropy weight analysis, it is in the scope of the journal. However, minor revisions are suggested.

COMMENTS :

Comment 1: Title

 I believe that it will be better authors to add the case study (study area: Xiongan New Area) is good for the paper the apparition and visibility in the database.

Comment 2: Abstract

Authors should add the findings and results in the abstract.

Comment 3: Introduction:  Line 86 90

This section should remove from the introduction, somewhat represent early results and recommendations, only keep the novelty and the gaps of knowledge in the introduction.

Comment 4: Figure.2:

Authors should redraw with high quality and add the adequate references.

Comment 5: Figure 9:

Authors should add:

·         Geographic coordinates

·         Orientation (Nord)

·         Scale bare

 

Comment 6: Figure 10-11:

Authors should redraw with high quality they not clear.

Comment 7: Discussion

· Discussion should improve as possible with similar case study and comparison (zero references in this important section).

·   Add the merits and demerits of your work, add the limitations of the proposal method and the future recommendations. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop