Next Article in Journal
Evaluation of Interference Analysis from 5G NR Networks to Aeronautical and Maritime Mobile Systems in the Frequency Band 4800–4990 MHz
Next Article in Special Issue
Application of AI-Based Techniques on Moody’s Diagram for Predicting Friction Factor in Pipe Flow
Previous Article in Journal
Kupffer Cells as a Target for Immunotherapy
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
J
Volume 6
Issue 1
10.3390/j6010001
Review Report
J-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Evaluating Preventive Measures for Flooding from Groundwater: A Case Study

J 2023, 6(1), 1-16; https://doi.org/10.3390/j6010001
by Raaghul Kumar and Munshi Md. Shafwat Yazdan *
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
J 2023, 6(1), 1-16; https://doi.org/10.3390/j6010001
Submission received: 13 September 2022 / Revised: 8 December 2022 / Accepted: 19 December 2022 / Published: 26 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Multidisciplinary Advances in Water Resources Engineering: A Special Issue in Honor of Prof. Dr. Prabhata Kumar Swamee)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript deals with demystifying the preventive measures for flooding by groundwater triggered by the rise of the level of the adjacent rivers. This manuscript is needed and some information needs to be added.

The abstract does not provide significant insights into this research. It would be better to provide some analytical values (ranges) that highlight this study. What type of pollution has spread significantly.

The introduction section should be updated with the latest references. The introduction focuses on the methods used to determine this research and reads as methodology up to date. Also, it does not appear to be a thorough literature review and the stated methods that were used in the study. If the authors could attempt to improve the introduction by thoroughly reviewing these methods, this study would serve as a valuable reference for the scientific community. How does this study differ from previous work? Provide a research gap to justify this current research. 

The methods used to select the criteria and validate the results need to be explained in more detail. QA/QC is needed.

Important part; the discussion part is insufficient and should be expanded. The results of the study should be compared with the results of relevant studies published in recent years to support the contributions and innovations of the study.

The conclusion needs to be rewritten by highlighting the key observations of this study. The author needs to add a statement about the management strategy plans based on this assessment.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Please see attached report.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I am happy with the revision. So, it is ready to be accepted.

Author Response

Thank you for your time and consideration!

Reviewer 2 Report

Some observations have not been adequately considered and addressed, such as the double s in the spelling of German names and the clarity and cleanliness of the images which still remain blurry and with useless or redundant information in visual communication, e.g. Fig. 1 very small streets name in the image, Fig. 6 too blurry

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

There are still blurry and unreadable figures. I don't reject the paper because the scientific content is valid but I draw attention to the need to take care of the communication and presentation of the visual results.

Back to TopTop