Sustainability Assessment of Municipal Infrastructure Projects Based on Continuous Interval Argumentation Ordered Weighted Average (C-OWA) and Cloud Models
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The study scores high on novelty and fills in the gap in current research works in this area. However, the quality of article can be improved by giving some insights on how this assessment method/strategy used in this case study is different to the currently used methods/strategy. A comparison can be done by discussing the past work in this area in a separate discussion section or as a part of conclusion section.
Author Response
According to your comments, we have made changes to the relevant parts, please see the attachment for details.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
1. Introduction
Additionally, because they required significant land use and long-term investment, these 45 infrastructure projects frequently resulted in noise pollution, ground and water pollution, 46 disturbance of human life and ecosystems, habitat fragmentation, and material consump- 47 tion that consumed enormous amounts of resources[11].
very long sentence. Kindly revise this sentence.
infrastructure projects construction and management 54
A little confusing. delete projects word
The above-mentioned problems are the concrete manifestations of the in- 55 frastructure project's unsustainability, the source of which is the lack of comprehensive 56 and systematic view of the problem in the sustainable evaluation of infrastructure pro- 57 jects, the insufficient consideration of the relationship among the factors, and the lack of 58 systematic thinking on the sustainable evaluation of these infrastructure projects[10].
Confusing and long sentence. Try paraphrase it in small sentences.
. Shen et al.[15]studied the sustainable de- 63 velopment of the projects by combining various methods, which revealed the deficiency 64 of examining the implementation performance of the construction projects from the point 65 of view of sustainable development.
Which methods or which deficiencies. Revise this reference and point to major aims of reference.
Fernandez-Sanchez et al.[16]developed a method for 66 determining, classifying, and determining sustainability indicators based on risk manage- 67 ment criteria that revealed the strengths and shortcomings of the proposed method in the 68 application of the infrastructure project in Spain.
which shortcomming. Explain it.
Aimbavboa et al. [18]adopted a quantitative research ap- 74 proach that addressed the challenge of preventing South Africa from adopting sustainable 75 building practices.
what was the benefit?
3. Methodology
let A be the equivalent qualitative concept on U( what does that mean. Explain it in some lines)
Cloud generator (CG) or cloud production algorithm can be implemented either 161 through software with modular components or through hardware treated with a cure.
Tell in detail about software or hardware methodologies done in this research
3.2. Continuous Interval Argument Ordered Weighted Average (C-OWA)
Method is unclear. Try using some flow charts or equations to explain it clearly
4.1. Sustainable evaluation of infrastructure projects based on cloud model
）According to the sustainability level of each index, the AHP is used to calculate 242 its weight based on the classification of sustainability grade. (Using the word AHP is not preferred first tell briefly what is AHP and how to do it.)
The cloud model of each primary evaluation factor is generated by the cloud 247 digital characteristics of secondary evaluation factors
Change the sentence. The meaning is unclear
4.2. Generation of sustainability standard cloud
Calculate entropy based on the results in (1)
why entropy have this equation. How tell briefly
Conclusion
conclusion should be brief and follow the title. Some bullet points will be better
The mathematical modals are discussed and applied. But knowledge is lacking that how these are applied clearly.
The methodology portion should be clarify clearly so that if young researcher read the paper they can get good knowledge about methodology. The software detail of its usage is lacking in this paper. Try using figures to tell the audience clearly about calculations and equations.
Author Response
According to your comments, we have made changes to the relevant parts, please see the attachment for details.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This study is interest and falls into the scope of this journal. While the following questions should definitely be addressed before any further publication consideration.
1. The proposed index system contians three aspects: environment, economy and society, while most indes system in this kind of study contains the technical aspects such as load bearing capacity, vulnerability and robustness ("Perspective Discrepancy between Designers and Constructors on the Sustainability of Steel Structures: Are They Synthesizable?" doi:10.3390/app11167430) , why this study ignored the technical aspects.
2. In table 1, the indicator “durability” is belong to economy aspect, that is wired.
3. The conclusion need to be further expaned for more useful sugesstions for practical use.
4. The language needs to be polished.
Author Response
According to your comments, we have made changes to the relevant parts, please see the attachment for details.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
accept
