| 查看: 3275 | 回复: 13 | ||||
| 【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题，作者Bazingga000将赠送您 96 个金币 | ||||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | ||||
Bazingga000新虫 (初入文坛)
|
[求助]
Physica A一审返回，审稿人意见求指点已有4人参与
|
|||
|
一审(三个月)返回两个审稿人意见，意见如下： 编辑邮件： Reviewers (2) have now commented on your manuscript and recommend a revision. For your guidance, reviewers' comments are appended below and in a separate file to download. Reviewer #1: comments This paper analyses the *******************************. While the topic of the paper is well suited to the scope of the journal, and its scientific contribution seems significant to the related field, this manuscript needs to be better prepared before it is considered to be published. Most of all, not all figures mentioned in the main text are presented. Thus the figure numbers in the text and figure title do not match which makes very difficult to review. Also, there are numerous numbers of variables and parameters. I'd suggest to include a table that describes variables and parameters. While the main focus of this research is to examine the *******, it is not clear how this strategy is applied. I think it should be more elaborated so the readers can reproduce the results. Reviewer #2: comments In this sense this work is interesting because it marries (for the first time as far as I know) the more complicated solution of the **** theory insteadof the simplified****, with an analysis of the ********of the network in order to ************* to increase robustness. Another useful feature of this work is to **************************** Still, I feel that because this problem has been looked through so many different techniques, ** and **, that it would increase tremendously theusefulness of this particular work and make it worth publication if a comparison could be included on the results that one would get through some of the other methods, to compare the usefulness of the current proposed approach. In summary, I feel that this is an interesting an original work, but the problems mentioned should be addressed before the paper is ready for publication. 第一个给了29条意见，第二个给了9条，编辑给了Revise。二位都对方向比较感兴趣，没有质疑方法，结果以及结论的讨论，主要对具体case应用的过程提出疑问觉得没写太清楚。各位虫友看看有希望吗？修改后是继续这两个人审还是重新找审稿人送审？ PS:修改稿要交 a list of all the changes made to the manuscript，这个是原文一句，改动一句这样写？第一次投稿，没经验。。 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
前同事拿我以前未中的国自然标书申请今年的国自然，现在基金委发来调查函
已经有7人回复
-
无under review，直接DIP，咋么办。
已经有7人回复
-
申请24博士 材料/化工/环境
已经有4人回复
-
一审一个审稿人，小修，会怎么样呀？
已经有9人回复
-
最近遇到这样一个问题
已经有10人回复
-
小孩7岁，上一年级，不自信，学习较差
已经有34人回复
-
家乡二本高校/沿海传统私企，如何抉择？
已经有14人回复
-
某系主任被同校教授举报包养情妇、长期嫖娼
已经有17人回复
-
找一个允许我去清华联合培养的研究生导师
已经有14人回复
-
考研英语带学
已经有6人回复
12楼2019-01-13 10:27:01
userwater
至尊木虫 (知名作家)
悠哉游哉
- 应助: 3 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 23682.6
- 散金: 1049
- 红花: 42
- 沙发: 2
- 帖子: 8985
- 在线: 316.8小时
- 虫号: 387229
- 注册: 2007-05-30
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 蔬菜学与瓜果学
2楼2017-05-07 13:04:20
paperhunter
荣誉版主 (文学泰斗)
还没想好
-
专家经验: +14 - SEPI: 1
- 应助: 14603 (教授)
- 贵宾: 11.659
- 金币: 345469
- 散金: 9262
- 红花: 1416
- 沙发: 2016
- 帖子: 127549
- 在线: 8879.2小时
- 虫号: 971012
- 注册: 2010-03-14
- 专业: 环境工程
- 管辖: 论文投稿
【答案】应助回帖
★ ★
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
Bazingga000(liouzhan654代发): 金币+2, 感谢交流 2017-05-07 14:38:20
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
Bazingga000(liouzhan654代发): 金币+2, 感谢交流 2017-05-07 14:38:20
|
二位都对方向比较感兴趣，没有质疑方法，结果以及结论的讨论，主要对具体case应用的过程提出疑问觉得没写太清楚。各位虫友看看有希望吗？修改后是继续这两个人审还是重新找审稿人送审？ 审稿人对文章的新意，研究的价值都没有异议，意见趋向正面，楼主参考审稿意见仔细修改，认真回复，修改到位，文章被接收的希望很大。修改后一般不会换审稿人，除非因故不能审稿。 S:修改稿要交 a list of all the changes made to the manuscript，这个是原文一句，改动一句这样写？ 就是要求列一份修改清单，类似这样的： 1. Line 60-61, the statements of “……” were corrected as “…………” 2. Line 107, “……” was added 3. Line 129, “……” was deleted ×××××× |
3楼2017-05-07 14:06:49
peterflyer 
木虫之王 (文学泰斗)
peterflyer
- 应助: 20282 (院士)
- 金币: 140502
- 红花: 1373
- 帖子: 92550
- 在线: 7679.6小时
- 虫号: 1482829
- 注册: 2011-11-08
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 玻璃材料
【答案】应助回帖
★ ★
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
Bazingga000(liouzhan654代发): 金币+2, 感谢交流 2017-05-07 14:38:27
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
Bazingga000(liouzhan654代发): 金币+2, 感谢交流 2017-05-07 14:38:27
|
如果修改得当，很可能很快就会被接受的。根据第一个审稿人的意见，楼主的手稿中图表不全，另外对问题的解决方法叙述的不够清楚，不容易让别人能够重复出你的结果。因此接下来就要仔细审阅稿件，把遗漏的补齐。第二个审稿人的意见是希望对同样的问题而用不同解决方法之间能有个参照和对比，有利于读者更容易吃透楼主的工作。 一方面要提交修改好了的文稿。另一方面要另外做个文件，对每个问题按照一问一答的方式进行回答，有利于返回原来的审稿人时能够快速了解楼主的修改內容。 |
4楼2017-05-07 14:13:40
10