Study on the Dynamic Response of Large Slopes Under Non-Uniform Seismic Excitation Considering the Slope Scale

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript presents a thoughtful analytical and numerical investigation into the dynamic behavior of large-scale slopes subjected to non-uniform seismic excitation. However, several areas require clarification, improvement in language, deeper contextualization, and expanded discussion to enhance the paper's impact and accessibility. Following are my comments for minor revision:
1. While applying BAP to slope dynamic response is innovative, the physical motivation behind using this approximation method over traditional wave theories could be elaborated further. How does BAP outperform or offer unique insights compared to classical ray-based or elastodynamic methods?

2.  Include the following articles for wider discussion and readership as per the aims and scope of the journals:
(a) Section 5 (Discussion): When discussing the potential for future research using multi-physics approaches (e.g., thermal-hydraulic-mechanical coupling).
Suggested: "Future research could explore the integration of multi-physics approaches—particularly those involving thermal-hydraulic-mechanical (THM) coupling to more accurately simulate the complex interactions within geomaterials under seismic loading. For instance, studies investigating cyclic thermal behavior in soils [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.06.404, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-91831-1, https://doi.org/10.3390/en14238191] highlight the significance of such interactions in transient response modeling.
(b) Section 2.2 (FDM modeling framework): When discussing modeling techniques for dynamic soil/rock response. Suggestion: "Although the FDM framework used in this study captures essential features of wave propagation and slope deformation, more granular approaches like the Dynamic Lattice Element Method (DLEM) could offer enhanced insight into localized failure mechanisms and cementation effects, particularly in heterogeneous rock slopes [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0886-8_53]."

3. The manuscript would benefit from a thorough language review. A few examples:

• Line 12: “An analytical model has been proposed to analyze…” should be “analyze”

• Line 359: “is applied to simulate the non-uniform incidence” should be “was applied to simulate…”

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors, thank you for your effort to prepare this interesting paper. 

1    Please underline the novelty in the introduction. You should add more papers about extreme seismic effects on the soil structure (impact on the slope, soil cover, etc.). This information can be found in a paper written by Maleska and Beben 2023 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107744), Jafarian et al. 2024 (https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2024.2363834), Shen et al. 2025 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2025.109331). However, please do not limit yourself to these papers only.
2.     Based on my experience, the elastic constitutive models (line 154) are not a good option for analyzing the seismic effect in soil. Please explain in detail why you used this soil model. Thus, your results are true?
3.    Please add the next step of your research in the last paragraph.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please check this paper by Native Speakers.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The work is interesting and respects the scope of Applied Sciences Journal, due to modelling of slope stabilization under seismic scenario. It contributes to the literature showing non-published content. However, it still needs some improvement regarding:  

1. I do not know if the Featured Application is needed separately to the Abstract, and it can address some insight for future works regarding the theme.
2. Abstract is missing to highlight the main objectives of the research and their impact on further investigation.
3. Last paragraph of the Introduction could be more fluid, exposing the organization of the research with using Sect.2,3…, in addition it could highlight the global goal of the investigation.
4. Introduction provides a great review in slope modelling; however, could emphasize the societal relevance of their research by aligning it with governmental directives for sustainable development. This content could be integrated into the Introduction or presented under a separate section titled Research Significance.
5. The model exposition and it results are very well presented; however, there is no discussion over it comparing it to other published works. In Discussion, there is a brief exposition of other authors’ type of investigation, however, it is missing a more in-depth comparison with results where others have presented different models or scenarios. It will enrich your manuscript, possibly improving further citation scores.
6. Conclusions are well shown; therefore, authors can expose the limitations of the study in addition to the future investigation based on what has been exposed.
7. Authors should incorporate references from a global perspective, including well-established sources on the fundamental principles of slope stability, and relate them to contemporary literature that either supports or challenges the findings presented.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf