PONE-D-24-04620The Temporal Distribution of Ridership in Metro Stations from Land-use PerspectivePLOS ONE

Dear Dr. SONG,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 14 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Dr. Walid Al-Shaar

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: "Youth Projects of Xi'an Jiaotong University City College [grant number: 2022Q01]"  

Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: ""The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.""

If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed.

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. We note that Figures 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 in your submission contain [map/satellite] images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figures 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9  to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.  

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an ""Other"" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: 1. the aim need to specify in the abstract

2. line 207, the author used 800 meters, why use this value

3. need to clear the time period of data collection of 30 minutes intervals

4. Add ref. for land search website

5. R2 is low for the second and third components, need to explain.

6. line 301 need to justify the writing

7. add paragraph for the work limitations and recommendation.

Reviewer #2: Thanks for presenting the manuscript entitled "The Temporal Distribution of Ridership in Metro Stations from Land-use Perspective". In this study, the relationship between the land use ratio around urban rail transit stations and the temporal distribution of passenger flows is explored using methods such as principal component analysis and geographical weighted regression (GWR) models. This study provides an important reference for optimizing land use around metro stations. However, the manuscript fails to meet the publication criteria of PLOS ONE in the following key aspects:

1) The innovativeness and research significance are not clearly articulated. Further optimization and refinement of the thesis structure and writing presentation are required.

2) The experiments are too simple, and the comparative analyses are not sufficient to prove the reliability and sophistication of the experiments.

3) Abbreviations should be given in parentheses the first time a technical term, such as PCA is used, in the manuscript the font is too small in part of line 301, the initial letter in line 305 is not capitalized, and there are grammatical errors in parts of the article.

4) Figures 1 to 9 in this manuscript are not clear. Please insert the original figures.

Overall, I cannot recommend it to be published at the current stage. Hope my comments will help authors to improve the manuscript.

Reviewer #3: Subject: Review of Manuscript: “Temporal Distribution of Ridership in Metro Stations from a Land-use Perspective”

Dear Editor and Authors,

I have carefully reviewed the manuscript titled “Temporal Distribution of Ridership in Metro Stations from a Land-use Perspective.” Overall, the study provides valuable insights into the relationship between land use and passenger flow at urban rail transit stations.

I have identified several major comments and questions that I believe need to be addressed before the manuscript can be considered for publication. However, I recommend addressing the following points:

1. Data Collection and Representativeness:

o Could you provide more details about the data sources used for passenger flow analysis? How was the data collected, and what is the sample size?

o How representative is the dataset of the overall metro system ridership?

2. Introduction:

o The introduction provides a clear and concise overview of the research problem. I suggested the following articles added in the manuscript:

o "The analysis of utilizing multiple fences in high-speed tracks on the aerodynamic characteristics of a high-speed train model," Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Mechanical Engineering, 2023.

o "The Influence of Inclined Barriers on Airflow over a High Speed Train under Crosswind Condition, In A. G. Hessami and R. Muttram, Book: New Research on Railway Engineering and Transportation, IntechOpen, 2023, ISBN 978-1-83768-620-9.

o "The optimum model determination of porous barriers in high-speed tracks," Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Vol. 236, Issue 1, pp. 15-25, 2022.

o "Multi Objective Optimization of Aerodynamic Design of High Speed Railway Windbreaks using Lattice Boltzmann Method and Wind Tunnel Test Results", International Journal of Rail Transportation, 2018.

o "2D and 3D numerical and experimental analyses of the aerodynamic effects of air fences on a high-speed train", Journal of Wind and Structures, Vol. 32, No. 6, pp.539-550, 2021.

o "Two-dimensional analysis of the influence of windbreaks on airflow over a high-speed train under crosswind by using Lattice Boltzmann Method ", Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Vol. 232, Issue. 3, pp. 863-872, 2018.

o "The Impact of Air Fences Geometry on Air Flow around an ICE3 High Speed Train on a Double Line Railway Track with exposure to Crosswinds", Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 743-754, 2018.

3. Interpretation of Principal Components:

o In the PCA analysis, how were the principal components interpreted? Specifically, what practical implications do the first, second, and third components have for transit planning?

o Were any other dimensionality reduction techniques considered besides PCA?

4. Spatial Variation and GWR:

o Could you elaborate on the spatial dependence analysis using the geographically weighted regression (GWR) model? How does it account for spatial heterogeneity?

o Were there specific areas around Xi’an where the relationships between factor loadings and influencing factors differed significantly?

5. Land Use Factors and Recommendations:

o Which specific land use types (e.g., residential, commercial, healthcare) contribute most significantly to morning and evening peak flows?

o Based on your findings, what actionable recommendations can be made for optimizing land use around metro stations?

6. Practical Implications:

o Discuss how transit agencies and policymakers can apply the study’s findings to enhance metro system performance.

o Consider proposing specific interventions based on the research outcomes.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to the field. I look forward to seeing the revised manuscript.

Sincerely,

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

The Temporal Distribution of Ridership in Metro Stations from Land-use Perspective

PONE-D-24-04620R1

Dear Dr. DAI,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Dr. Walid Al-Shaar

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE 

**********