Dispersion Curve Interpolation Based on Kriging Method
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript submitted by Han Zhang et. al deals with the application of Kriging method for the interpolation of dispersion curve. The results and discussion sections reflect the quality of the paper in some ways, but the manuscript as a whole is poorly organized, and the presentation is neither clear nor concise. I would like to make the following comments and required changes to make this manuscript acceptable for publishing.
Comment 1: The manuscript needs extensive revision for language and grammar. It is also recommended to avoid first person pronouns thorough out the manuscript.
Comment 2: The abstract of the paper should explain the aim of the paper and include the most relevant results and conclusions, emphasizing the importance and novelty of the work. I would prefer to see some data in the abstract, rather than an irrelevant description.
Comment 3: There is no description of the state of the art relating to the specific topic. This fact prevents the paper from being framed within the existing literature and therefore prevents expressing a positive judgement on the level of originality and innovativeness brought to the specific field.
Comment 4: The introductory section should clearly describe the aim and the relevance of the presented research. It should also indicate, why the methodology used in the present study was chosen and why it will provide new insights.
Comment 5: Use a consistent font size throughout the paper, including in figures and figure captions.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
It is quite interesting that information was obtained up to 15 km depth with ambient noise used as data in the article. This situation needs to be explained in detail. In general, a study on a very specific subject has been revealed. However, although it aims to solve a problem, the results obtained with the chosen method are not interesting. On the other hand, it can be considered as an important study in terms of study groups carrying out similar studies. In Figure 3, the location of the theta angle is not understood. The article will be in acceptable condition if the depth assessment that can be reached from my point of view is explained.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The present paper aims to apply kriging for the interpolation of dispersion curves, and the feasibility of the process is verified through several tests The subject is important and relevant to the Applied sciences Journal. The quality of the manuscript however should be improved significantly, so I would like to suggest a complete revision before submitting it again. Please find below my comments.
1- What I most concerned about the manuscript is its novelty. Generally speaking, the the topic of this study is Spatial–temporal interpolation. Neither the topic nor the method is new. Therefore I recommend the authors to fully stress what is new in the study (compared with previous works) and what new knowledge we can learn from their results.
2- The manuscript tends to be elaborative and make a meal of the subject matter (this is true in Introduction, Data, Methodology strategy and the presentation of the results). Often, there is no structure in the arguments. I hasten to add that I am complaining about absence of structure and communication style, as a result of which it is easy to be bogged down most of the time. I would strongly recommend that the authors communicate the subject matter. For instance, consider the results. I would be keen to see that (i) the authors identify the structure in the figures and tables in the results section and marshal them in a logical succession; (ii) state each figure/table in a sentence or two; (iii) state clear information outright as a message, as deduced from the figure/table; and (iii) if necessary, qualify the main message. In this way the results will become more understandable. The Introduction section is related to what other people have done, whereas it should explain the authors' work in the context of the state-of-the-art.
3- To verify the feasibility of applying kriging, I recommend to use more statical indicators beside RMSE
4- I have a major concern on the proposed protocol the authors implemented, which lacks sensitivity analysis. I recommend performing the sensitivity analysis to assess the relative importance of the input variables. Thus, the scarce information provided in this section in combination is misleading to the reader.
5- In results section, the interpretation of the results is not getting deep and the outcomes are very general I would recommend adding more discussions about their results and findings to make clear the new contributions that the manuscript supports, including important implications of your work on the scientific community
6- Gap analysis needs to be made in relation to the study area but state if there is any limitation for the Proposed strategy of interpolation.
7- In the conclusions section, the authors could have made a better effort to explain what is better understood in the case they presented better than general speaking
8- Change the header from Remote sensing Journal to Applied sciences Journal
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
The article is good and can be published where the idea is new
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I have examined the revised manuscript and satisfied with the revisions made.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you for your explanations and improvement of the MS.
Reviewer 3 Report
There are major improvements in the manuscript. Most comments appear to have been dealt with. I satisfied with many improvements like clarification of the feasibility of applying kriging, the explanation behind the sensitivity analysis, and the modification of the conclusion section. I would recommend to accept this manuscript in this form
