Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The provide a well-structured and technically sound manuscript. The topic is of current interest and the work developed is relevant for the scientific community. No errors were found nor any corrections are required. In my opinion, the manuscript is ready for publication.

Author Response

Thank you for the positive comments and the opinion considering that the article is ready for publication (the manuscript is ready for publication).

 

Best Regards, 

Philippe Terrier

Reviewer 2 Report

In the paper "optimisation procedure" is poorly described. 

From mathematical point of view first of all the aim function has to be defined with some limitations (boundary condititions).

In the present form it looks and sounds much more as a form of sensitivity or questionary study instead to be real optimistaion procedure.

Additionally, optimisation means in this case that we want to maximse/minimise something ??? No criteria at all.

There is no justifications and discussion of values put into Table 2 to the evaluation and weighting process.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx