当前位置: 首页 > 论文投稿 >reject and resubmit

reject and resubmit

作者 hualeina
来源: 小木虫 400 8 举报帖子
+关注

各位虫友,麻烦过来看一下
我的一篇文章在5个月前投到一影响因子为2.0的期刊(本领域算不低的了),被主编直接以英语太烂拒掉。之后修四个月,期间请三位国外友人(美国人一个,在美中国人两个)看过,我还是坚持尝试,一个月前再投,现在结果是reject and resubmit(真不清楚这是啥决定)。主编回信如下:
In view of the comments of the referees, I must decline the manuscript for publication in **** at this time.  However, a new manuscript may be submitted which takes into consideration these comments.  In the previous version of this manuscript the editor had commented on obscure expressions and written language.  The reviewers of the present manuscript raise similar issues.  If you wish to resubmit your manuscript, please be sure to respond to the comments of the reviewers in full.  Regarding the language usage, you may wish to use an English language checking service, such as those listed on the Wiley web site。。。
Please note that resubmitting your manuscript does not guarantee eventual acceptance, and that your resubmission will be subject to re-review before a decision is rendered.
附一个审稿人意见:
This paper revisits a well-known problem in the modeling of **, that of obtaining accurate and non-oscillatory solutions for coupled hydro-mechanical problems, the difficulty being that the order of the displacement solution has to be greater than that for the pore water pressure. The use of the ** is innovative and a positive feature of this work.
另一个审稿人意见:

in the present paper, the ** technique is stabilized by using less points for the pressure approximation than for the displacements. This, essentially, causes the pressure to be approximated with low accuracy than the displacement. Hence, it follows the same idea as Taylor-Hood-elements in a FEM formulation. Surprisingly, the use of different ansatz orders like for Taylor-Hood elemtns does not work for the **. There is no mathematical proof but two studies which show that the idea work. Unfortunately, the essential question what must be the relation between the amount of nodes for the displacement and the pressure approximation is not answered.(帮忙看看这个审稿人是支持还是反对)
其实那两个审稿人提的问题没有特别尖锐的问题,一般是些词语不当之类。
由于作者就是我一个人,在此领域又是第一次,大家有没有这种经验的?感觉好艰难啊,有如此经历的说说看。。。。谢谢。

[ Last edited by hualeina on 2010-6-22 at 10:33 ] 返回小木虫查看更多

今日热帖
  • 精华评论
  • xinxin2008

    让再投就有希望!好好改。。。

  • commonman

    我就在在经历同样的事情
    去年投的一篇文章,搞到今年2月份,也是拒稿让重投,三月份投出去,刚刚回来意见,还是小修,郁闷的不行,都因为这个文章搞的延期了

    LZ如果能等得起,不妨重投试试,把文章改的猛一点,回复写的长一些表表诚意,希望还是蛮大的;
    但是,如果等着文章毕业,那就要掂量好了,不能在一棵树上吊死啊!
    供参考!

  • hualeina

    引用回帖:
    Originally posted by commonman at 2010-06-22 11:33:48:
    我就在在经历同样的事情
    去年投的一篇文章,搞到今年2月份,也是拒稿让重投,三月份投出去,刚刚回来意见,还是小修,郁闷的不行,都因为这个文章搞的延期了

    LZ如果能等得起,不妨重投试试,把文章改的猛一点 ...

    谢谢你的建议。我等得起,说实话,我现在有点跟这个期刊较上劲了,只要每次都有点进步就行。只要咱们努力,到最后即使结果不好,也没啥好后悔的

  • ad7023

    重投吧。。

  • laozhu557

    重投吧。。  
    搞死这个期刊

  • kile

    大概是这个journal的review规定最多只有X轮,如果review了X轮之后reviewer既不表示可以接收也不reject,那就只好先reject再建议submit,重新开始审。

    第二个reviewer明显是负面意见

  • aimit

    给机会就有希望,楼主加油。

猜你喜欢
下载小木虫APP
与700万科研达人随时交流
  • 二维码
  • IOS
  • 安卓