当前位置: 首页 > 论文投稿 >审稿意见回来了,可不知道审稿人到底什么意思

审稿意见回来了,可不知道审稿人到底什么意思

作者 jiasen1980
来源: 小木虫 1300 26 举报帖子
+关注

Reviewer #1: The paper reports experimental results which seem sound and reliable enough. They demonstrate the dependence of the transmission of a probe signal through a plate of a Kerr-nonlinear material in the two-color experiment, taking into account the partial self-focusing of the pump signal. Some theoretical interpretation is given too.While the reported results are easy to understand, the paper does not present a sufficient explanation of the novelty of the findings. Measurements based on optical Kerr shutters were definitely made in many previous works. What is really new in the present one, in comparison with previous publications? The authors stress their observation of two-peak time-resolved signals, but they do not mention if similar outputs were observed in other works.


特别是这段话什么意思啊?
As concerns references to the self-focusing, and the possibility of the generation of plasma by a light beam in the Kerr-nonlinear medium close to the collapse point, it seems strange that references concerning these commonly known features are given to papers [16] and [17], published in 2005 and 2007, respectively. Do the authors imply that these facts were not know before? 返回小木虫查看更多

今日热帖
  • 精华评论
  • xianguilin

    这个意见很积极,肯定了你的工作,只是需要做出小修就可以了,你要认真的按照审稿人的意见进行修改,肯定可以中的!

  • gzq

    同意啊,努力

  • hithegang

    这个意见很积极,肯定了你的工作,只是需要做出小修就可以了

  • snack

    楼上两位没把意思看懂吧,我看怎么审稿人蛮刁钻的呢。如果是两个审稿人的,第二个审稿人对你的文章及其不爽,说你的在文中直接忽视了前人已经报道了的工作,让后把别人做过了的东西装做没看见,自己说成创新。第一个审稿人也大致是这个意思。总之,就是他们认为创新性不够啊。

  • hitechceram

    感觉意见不是很积极。编辑什么意思??、

  • yangdafaok

    积极的回复!

  • visitor958

    " it seems strange that references concerning these commonly known features are given to papers [16] and [17], published in 2005 and 2007, respectively. Do the authors imply that these facts were not know before? "

    有没有更早一些年的文献引一下?最好是你领域里出名的老文章,

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