Advancing Coastal Flood Risk Prediction Utilizing a GeoAI Approach by Considering Mangroves as an Eco-DRR Strategy

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congratulations on the very interesting & thorough work.

Please find attached some comments that can potentially improve the manuscript and overall research framework.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to thank the reviewer for this comprehensive and perceptive feedback. The reviewer's comments have been instrumental in enhancing the manuscript's methodology, clarity, and rigor. Herein, we provide point-by-point responses to each suggestion and have revised the manuscript accordingly to improve its comprehensiveness and reproducibility.

Please see the attachment for the response to the reviewer.

Thank you 

Best Regards,

Martiwi Diah Setiawati

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript deals with an interesting topic.

However, several revisions are needed before publication.

In detail:

- the Introduction deals little with the general concepts of Coastal Flood, Coastal Flood Risk, Coastal Flood Risk prediction, and GeoAI approaches and should be improved

- the description of the case study between lines 94 and 98 is too synthetic and lacks both quantitative information on coastal floods and an accurate description of the reason why El Salvador was chosen as a case study

- paragraph 3.1 lacks results, which should be added while what has been written so far should be moved to the Methodology section

- the general section 3 Results also contain discussion parts that should be moved to section 4

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English is not very fluent in many parts, especially in the Introduction, and a review by a native English speaker is recommended.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We thank the reviewer for their insightful comments, which have greatly improved our manuscript's clarity, depth, and scientific rigor. We'd like to provide a detailed, point-by-point response to each reviewer's suggestions, with corresponding changes highlighted in the revised manuscript.

Please find the attached file for the detailed response to the reviewer's comments.

Thank you

Best regards 

Martiwi Diah Setiawati

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I want to copliment you on your efforts which I believe led to a much improved revised manuscript. I am satisfied with the changes, save for two minor comments:
Point 1 refers to the Feature importances (Fig 6). I notice that the extreme sea level, which is actually the only physical driver considered that can cause coastal flooding has an importance of 2%. Does this suggest that waves are the main physical driver leading to wave overtopping and innundation then?
Please expand a bit on the physical interpretation of these obtained feature importances and implications.

Point 2 refers to the modified Figure 7.If I am not mistaken the risk scores between Fig 7a and Fig 7b have different limits in the colorbar and colors. This makes it hard to intercompare the spatial extend of the flood risk. Please revise and utilize a same colorbar and value limits.

And finally, congratulations on your work

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English in general are quite improved, please however carefully check if the meaning of some sentences is what the authors intend to convay.

For example lines 252-257 state " The country's substantial history of coastal flood events, where the database is openly available, as extensively provided by the Dartmouth Flood Observatory and mapped spatially in the Global Flood Observatory"

This sentence seems to be missing something.

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for their thoughtful and constructive feedback, which has contributed significantly to improving the quality and clarity of our manuscript. We are pleased that the revisions have largely addressed your previous concerns, and we appreciate your recognition of our efforts. Below, we provide a detailed, point-by-point response to your comments and suggestions.

Please find the attached file for detailed point-by-point response to your comments and suggestions

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The Authors have thoroughly revised the manuscript and satisfactorily responded to the reviewers' comments.

Therefore, it is possible to accept the manuscript in its present form.

Author Response

We express our gratitude to the reviewer for their favourable input and commendations for our modifications. We are pleased that the amended content has fulfilled your expectations and that our comments have adequately addressed your issues. Your insightful recommendations throughout the review process have been crucial in enhancing the clarity, rigour, and general quality of this work. Thank you once again for your kind evaluation and assistance.

Please find the attached pdf for details

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf