A Python Application for Visualizing an Imbricate Thrust System: Palomeque Duplex (SE, Spain)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper introduces a Python application for visualizing an imbricate thrust system. The application uses the traditional geologic information to create a HTML geological map with real topography and a set of geological cross-sections with the essential structural and stratigraphic elements. The results proved the good performance of this Python application for visualizing the structural and stratigraphic architecture. This paper shows an advanced method for visualizing an imbricate thrust system, which is very meaningful for future groundwater, mining and civil engineering management. However, there are still some problems before the manuscript can be accepted.

1. The authors provided a new interesting method, whereas the methodology is not properly introduced, which is suggested to be supplement for better understanding.

2. The studied area Sierra Espuña area has been studied by many researchers, which is very representative. On the other hand, this is a very common example, and at least another one with more unique features is suggested to be added to strengthen the reliability of the proposed model.

3. What is the difference between the new method with the existing commercial software? More comparison is necessary to show the advantages of the proposed model.

4. In fact, for a new proposed method, this paper is too short to illustrate all the concerned items of readers. More introduction, information, discussions are in great need.

5. For the current version, the superiority and value of the proposed method cannot be clearly understood, because the unique function or advantages have not been well shown.

6. Some figures are not clear to show the corresponding information, which are suggested to be revised.

Author Response

1. The authors provided a new interesting method, whereas the methodology is not properly introduced, which is suggested to be supplement for better understanding.

It is not usual in software publications to reproduce in the manuscript the long succession of command lines of the software. It is normal to locate this part as supplementary material or better in a repository. The methodology is extended and very boring to be inserted in the manuscript. We have uploaded all the methodology in a github repository (https://github.com/bullejos/visualizing-an-imbricate-thrust-system) and can be consulted by everybody. The link to this repository is introduced in the manuscript and everybody can copy and paste in their web browser.

Nevertheless, we have updated our manuscript in order to better introduce the general trends of our methodology for a better understanding.

2. The studied area Sierra Espuña area has been studied by many researchers, which is very representative. On the other hand, this is a very common example, and at least another one with more unique features is suggested to be added to strengthen the reliability of the proposed model.

We want to explain that our manuscript shows a visualization system for a better viewing of geological structures and not an automatized system of representation. So, a lot of work and time is necessary to reach the 3D HTML file with the visualization of a geological structure. The suggestion of another example is unapproachable at this moment: several months will be necessary for that purpose. Nevertheless, we have published and cited in the manuscript previous papers with other visualizations (see Bullejos et al., 2022a,b; 2023 and Martín-Martín et al., 2023 in the Llobregat River Delta, Barcelona, Spain). Moreover, the selected key-case introduced a great variety of geological structures as folds (anticlines and synclines), faults and thrusts. In conclusions, in our opinion, the reliability of the proposed model is quite strengthened.

3. What is the difference between the new method with the existing commercial software? More comparison is necessary to show the advantages of the proposed model.

Again, this is a visualization system for a better viewing of geological structures and not an automatized system of representation. The main difference with the commercial software is that commercial applications, cost money and are expensive, while our method is free. On another hand, commercial applications require the learning of the software. Also, these applications usually need a lot of input data to work. The software we have created can be followed by a Python beginner step-by-step through the model creation so that one person can, following suit, adapt the inputs and mimic the procedures to create their own model.  Our method is mainly based on the Matpoltlib graphical library, which is a very comprehensive and simple graphical Python library. There is no difficulty to install or set up the Python environment in which our mythology work since most of the libraries or modules used are very common and usually come installed in the standard Python environments. To set up the environment where a geological open source tool work is usually difficult; sometimes because the tool is not updated and used old Python modules versions. Another difficulty that we found using other geological tools is that they usually require a big amount of data (usually obtained by geological drilling) which is difficult to obtain in remote locations and without a big economic support. The data we use to build our model are obtained by geologists with traditional fieldworks (geological mapping and measuring of stratigraphic sections and columns) with no machinery. The geologist experience is basic to adapt the model to reality. Finally, we highlight that one of the biggest advantages of our method is the output format that we give to the model, as an html file. It only requires a common web browser to open and manipulate it.

All this explanation is now introduced in the new version of our manuscript.

4. In fact, for a new proposed method, this paper is too short to illustrate all the concerned items of readers. More introduction, information, discussions are in great need.

We have updated and completed the former version of our manuscript also with the help of the other two reviewers. Now our manuscript is enlarged in order to give a broader information about the proposed method.

5. For the current version, the superiority and value of the proposed method cannot be clearly understood, because the unique function or advantages have not been well shown.

This has been updated. As commented before, the great advantage is the use of standard Python libraries that usually are in the Python standard environment, not requiring a special installation. So, a beginner in Python can follow the process.

6. Some figures are not clear to show the corresponding information, which are suggested to be revised.

Figures have been updated with the precise and concrete indications of other reviewers.

Reviewer 2 Report

Bullejos and Martín-Martí presented a study to use python programming to show a thrust-fault system in three dimensions (3D). The authors applied a few external python modules to build up a processing flow to injest data including locations of sampling points, topography data and profiles into a 3D model. The practical visualization package in 3D is always highly demanding. However, the current shape of the manuscrispt should be improved before to be considered for publication in the journal.

1) The main contents are like a application log created for a learner on how to use python to visualize the geological data. This is not really helpful to other new comers to follow. I would suggest the authors to functionize the workflow with python into few python scripts to allow others to make a 3D map with limited inputs. 

2) If 1) works for the authors, I would suggest to modify the title as "A python package (XXX) for visualizing an imbricate thrust system: case study for Palomeque Duplex (SE, Spain)". XXX can be a name to be made by the authors. 

3) A table with all required python modules in the work will be much more helpful than the way presented in the current manuscript. In the table, we would like to see the names, functionalities,  usuage of the modules and installations.

4) The quality of figures are low. It is better to add geoference information in Figure 1. 

5) Some english errors should be corrected.

p1,line 16, In abstract, slip-strike should be changed to "strike-slip".

p2,line 69, belong to belongs. 

p2, line90, add , after in paticular

p3, a), b) and c) should be placed normally. For now, I almost ignored there is a B. 

p4, line 107, slip-strike kinematic to strike-slip kinematics

p5, lines 147-148, the sentense can be simplified as " ... two columns for utm_x and utm_y."

p5, line 163, thrust is one kind of faults. So it is not necessary to put all these two in parallel. 

p10, line 309, demonstrate to demonstrates

Author Response

1) The main contents are like an application log created for a learner on how to use python to visualize the geological data. This is not really helpful to other new comers to follow. I would suggest the authors to functionize the workflow with python into few python scripts to allow others to make a 3D map with limited inputs. 

One of the advantages of our method is that we mainly use the graphic library Matplotlib which is very standard and usually comes with any standard Python environment so that is usually installed. We also use libraries as Pandas, NumPy or SymPy which also are very standard. Before developing our own method to model a geologic context we have try other tools based on Python. For example, we try to do it with GemPy but we found several problems that make us try our own method: (1) we do not have a big amounts of geological data (coming for examples of multiples geological drilling as, for example, GenPy needs) to get appropriated model; our data uses traditional geological information derived from geological mapping, performing of geological cross sections and measuring of stratigraphic columns, so we play with the experience of a geologist who will have to adapt the data so that outputs agree with what is expected from previous studies. It will be difficult to make things automatic so that one supplies the geological data and get the model without human intervention; (2) once an open source tool is successful it normally becomes commercial and loses its open source character; as it happened with GemPy, which can be still used but it is no updated and it is very complicate to install with the new Python package updates. Therefore, our objective is to use standard Python libraries (mainly Matplotlib) to get the models. We are on the way to achieve this goal and in this paper, we present a first step. We are working in the next one but several months will be necessary. We appreciate the referee suggestion of create a module or a library in Python that make more automatic the process and allows other researches use it, without many knowledges of python or mathematic but at this moment we don’t have the resources that this task will need. Now all the above is better explained in the new version of the manuscript.

2) If 1) works for the authors, I would suggest to modify the title as "A python package (XXX) for visualizing an imbricate thrust system: case study for Palomeque Duplex (SE, Spain)". XXX can be a name to be made by the authors. 

As commented before the suggested change is unapproachable for us at this moment and we have leaved the title as before.

3) A table with all required python modules in the work will be much more helpful than the way presented in the current manuscript. In the table, we would like to see the names, functionalities, usuage of the modules and installations.

We have performed three new tables to be incorporated to the new version of the manuscript: Table 1 introduces the tools used apart from Python; Table 2 reports the Python libraries used; and Table 3 summarized the custom functions defined.

4) The quality of figures is low. It is better to add geoference information in Figure 1.

Figures have been updated also with the suggestions from Reviewer 3. In Figure 1 georeferentiation has been added.

 5) Some english errors should be corrected.

All the English corrections appearing in the list below have been corrected.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

p1,line 16, In abstract, slip-strike should be changed to "strike-slip".

p2,line 69, belong to belongs. 

p2, line90, add , after in paticular

p3, a), b) and c) should be placed normally. For now, I almost ignored there is a B. 

p4, line 107, slip-strike kinematic to strike-slip kinematics

p5, lines 147-148, the sentense can be simplified as " ... two columns for utm_x and utm_y."

p5, line 163, thrust is one kind of faults. So it is not necessary to put all these two in parallel. 

p10, line 309, demonstrate to demonstrates

All the above corrections appearing in the list have been corrected.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Editor,

Thank you for assigning me as the reviewer for this article. I appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback. The authors have presented a well-structured and highly interesting piece of work. However, a minor revision is necessary before publication in the Geosciences journal. I have provided all my comments and suggestions in the attached PDF.

Thank you again for entrusting me with this review.

Sincerely,

 Anonymous Reviewer

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

I have provided all my comments and suggestions in the attached PDF. Thank you again for entrusting me with this review.

We have addressed all the suggestions provided in the annotated pdf. The main issues were the following:

General comment on the use of the term "3D model": In your work, the term "3D model" is referenced multiple times. However, to create a 3D model, it is necessary to include geological sections beneath the topography. In the 3D model, there are surfaces and even volumes below the topography. With the script, in addition to visualizing fault traces, geological boundaries, and flattened section traces on the DEM, are you able to incorporate the sections beneath the traces? If so, can it be included as supplementary material as HTML 3Dmodel?

Now we have included the set of geological cross sections in our HTML model to obtain a 3D models as requested by the reviewer. These geological cross sections ca be hidden separately. This new HTML accomplished the former (3D_Palomeque_map.html) and is equally supplied as supplementary material with the name (3D_Palomeque_map_sections.html). With this new HTML we have performed the new Figure 7 with screenshots of this new HTML.

Other comments in the annotated pdf are:

1. Introduction and 2. Study area: Some references are requested to be included

Now all the requested references have been included

Figure 1: Some improvements are requested: more structural details, coordinates.

All the requested improvements have been performed in Figure 1

Figure 2: Some improvements are requested: reorganize the legend and about the symbology in strike-slip faults.

All the requested improvements have been performed in Figure 3

3.1 section. The formatting of this chapter is different from the rest of the article. Please uniform it.

The requested formatting uniformization have been performed.

In the same section on link did not work

The link has been replaced and now it works.

Figure 5 is mentioned in the main text, but the Figure 5 reference must be cited between the references of Fig 4 and Fig 6 and not after Fig 6. Please adjust it.

Now this figure is correctly cited

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

All the comments have been addressed, and the manuscript is suggested to be accepted.