Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Detailed comments
table titles (Tab. 1, Tab. 2
"Table 1. This is a table caption. Tables should be placed in the main text near to the first time they are cited." are the editorial remarks, are they?

Main note
The presented conclusions are a short presentation of the work carried out.
They should be more extended (present the results of the research supported by the values ​​of the parameters achieved.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The content of the article is consistent with the scientific area of the International Journal of Geo-Information. The subject raised by the authors is current and so far rarely noticed by other authors publishing in this area.

The paper has an original, scientific character: for a better clarification, please edit your paper as follows:

1. Enlarge the Introduction with current results reported in the world and Europe
2. define better the scientific results
3. Improve the reference list

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The results presented show the effectiveness of the method. I suggest to expand the discussion section with pros and cons, even comparing with the existing literature. Conclusion are really poor and need to be expanded, considering the future work the authors intend to perform and the opportunities for other findings in the field

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx