Simulation of Marine Debris Path Using Mathematical Model in the Gulf of Thailand

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

This paper is interesting and very well written and organized. The following major issues should be solved before final publication.

1. Please carefully proofread this paper, hopefully by native English speakers.

2. In the affiliation part, please provide full name of "CSE/ECE" etc.

3. In the introduction part, please do not use [1-4] but to explain each of them.

4. It is suggested to merge section 2 and 3 as related work, since they are all relevant background knowledge.

5. Please allign all equations in a better way.
And please change "Where" to "where" and move it to the front on certain line below certain equations.

6. Some figures like Fig. 1 are vague and please re-draw them.

7. Reference part can be improved, and more relevant papers about "

 

Designing a new fast solution to control isolation rooms in hospitals depending on artificial intelligence decision, A stochastic computing procedure to solve the dynamics of prevention in HIV system, A hybrid swarming computing approach to solve the biological nonlinear Leptospirosis system, Intelligent computing technique for solving singular multi-pantograph delay differential equation" is suggested like below. 8- A schematic figure representing the physical phenomenon of problem studied needs to be included.

 

  9-Should explain how accurate the results as compared the earlier results (with other methods).  

 

     

 

Author Response

Please see attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Abstract, in the last few lines, should better describe the key results. In current format, the results presented in the abstract are not very clear. 

L10: the research -- change to --> This research

keywords should be separated with a comma. 

The introduction is very case specific and regional-focused and is missing on the literature review which needs addressing. There are very few literatures (4) mentioned in the section which is not acceptable for journal standards. You state the problem of marine debris in Thailand very well and this justifies the research need, but you don't describe the previous research that investigated the underlying mechanisms that govern these pollutants/debris transport in the marine environment (doi.org/10.9753/icce.v34.waves.49; doi.org/10.9753/icce.v35.currents.16; doi.org/10.9753/icce.v36v.papers.63). the overall idea is that previous research has identified and quantified key underlying mechanisms of movement of pollutants and debris in the coastal waters. 

Method design is reasonable - the main question for this section is that if you used software/ existing code, you must mention the specific names of the models used in this study.  

Results: can you describe the rationale of Fig3? also, why Fig. 3 doesn't have any mentions in the test? 

the model's spatial and temporal resolution must be mentioned clearly in this section. it is not clear how the model is set up at spatial (grid length) and temporal (time-step) scales. 

Another key concern that is not addressed in the text is the validation and calibration of the model, i.e. why the readers should trust your results? what existing/measured data are used to cross-check the model performance? the standard model verification steps need mentioning. you need to also be aware of and mention model's uncertainty (doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08417-4) and the methods to quantify uncertainties from model predictions.  

The conclusion is largely repeating the results, but you need to talk about the impacts of the findings and their significance. You need to discuss the model uncertainties in the conclusions. the name of models used in the study should be mentioned in the conclusion.

Author Response

Please see attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This work uses a numerical model to study the tracking marine debris in the Gulf of Thailand. It is an interesting work, but needs to go through a lot of revision before it can be considered for publication.

 

1.     The title needs to be revised. It is a numerical study and a case study. The numerical model is based on the shallow water equation. This study does not develop a mathematical model.

2.     Line 67, ρ is the density of water, ρa is the density of water. Why two density of water?

3.     The grid size is 0.25 degree. The grid convergence analysis is required.

4.     It is suggested to use the measurements to validate the numerical model.

5.     The labels and text in the figures are not clear.

6.     Two papers are suggested:

Ren, Z. Y., Zhao, X., Wang, B. L., Dias, F., & Liu, H. (2017). Characteristics of wave amplitude and currents in South China Sea induced by a virtual extreme tsunami. Journal of Hydrodynamics, 29(3), 377-392.

 

Ren, Z., Liu, H., Jimenez, C., & Wang, Y. (2022). Tsunami resonance and standing waves in the South China Sea. Ocean Engineering, 262, 112323.

Author Response

Please see attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper can be accepted in the present form.

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have revised the paper and addressed most of the comments. I think the paper is publishable following proofreading.