查看: 200  |  回复: 4
【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题,作者wojiaozjf将赠送您 5 个金币

wojiaozjf

新虫 (初入文坛)

[求助] JAP悲剧了怎么办?求助已有1人参与

这样悲剧了,怎么办?在线等,很急……
Your manuscript, referenced below, has been reviewed for publication in the Journal of Applied Physics.

"Propagation dynamics of picosecond electron bunch produced by Micro-Pulse electron Gun"


Included below are the reviewer comments. In view of the recommendations, we feel that we cannot accept your paper for publication.

I regret being unable to send you a more favorable report.
Editor's Comments:


Reviewer Comments:
Reviewer #1 Evaluations:
Significant Advance: No
New Research: No
Innovative Technology: No
Scientific Advances: No
Real World Applications: Yes
English Correct: Yes
Good Title: Yes
Descriptive Abstract: Yes
Good Figures: Yes
Adequate References: No

Reviewer #1 (REMARKS to AUTHOR(s)):

This paper is a very thorough examination of a compact rf gun, however, the authors must realize it is not new. This paper is more like a well written internal report. In order to qualify for publication in JAP, there must be new physics leading to an interesting application or established physics that is used in a novel way. This paper is neither. The method of calculating the electron propagation dynamics is solid but there is no serious consideration of other well established codes in the particle physics community for this that are readily available to do these calculations at the same level of rigor (GPT and ASTRA for example).

I would be more enthusiastic about accepting this paper if there were experimental results. The authors must wait to publish some brief theoretical analysis (this work) with their experimental findings. My biggest problem with this work is that this design and concept is extremely well known. No one uses it because of the high power required to drive the cavity for relatively low electron energy gains. It is a very low efficiency device. I also note the authors do not cite the work of Kraus' group (New J Phys paper) that examined the same concept...and have yet to implement because of the power requirements and relative small improvement in performance.

Other points:

- the authors should actually read some of the references and not simply parrot them. Ref. 11 for example is largely discredited by the field (other than the Zewail camp) as they have yet to observe subps dynamics to claim real time monitoring of atomic motions. For real space imaging, if you go through the numbers, using 1 electron/pulse imaging will take 10^10 to 10^12 photon cycles for one signal count. Most of the work shows dynamics and spatial resolution one could obtain with a optical microscope. There are other reviews that are more balanced and actually show space-time resolution in the Angstrom-100fs window critical to resolving atomic motions.

- some spelling errors (minor)

- discussion that no one has treated the near surface extraction process is incorrect. Full simulations have been done and with greater care in treating the initial electron distribution critical to getting the electron pulse dynamics correct.

In summary, this is a solid study. I don't want to be too discouraging. It is just not a stand alone paper. With experiment,this theoretical analysis and simulation (in much compressed form) will make for a very strong contribution to the field. Please include this work with the experiments that one assumes will be forthcoming.


Reviewer #2 Evaluations:
Significant Advance: Yes
New Research: No
Innovative Technology: No
Scientific Advances: Yes
Real World Applications: Yes
English Correct: No
Good Title: Yes
Descriptive Abstract: No
Good Figures: Yes
Adequate References: Yes

Reviewer #2 (REMARKS to AUTHOR(s)):

The paper studies the effects of space charge on pulse length broadening in a Micro-Pulse electron Gun. The pulse propagation dynamics are analyzed in three stages: beam generation region, acceleration region, and drift region. Both theoretical models and particle-in-cell simulations are presented. While the results are certainly of importance to the generation of short electron bunches for a broad range of applications, the manuscript requires considerable revisions.

First of all, to be published in JAP, the English needs to be improved. The article would benefit greatly from further readings for grammar, clarity, brevity, and idiomatic use of language.

Below are some other comments on the article:

In Fig. 4, it would be helpful to point out the range of electric fields in which MPG could run with self-bunching effects.

It would be necessary to state the assumptions/approximations used in deriving eqs. 13 and 25.

2nd line after eq. 12, "F_E makes no contribution to bunch length broadening ...". This statement is not true if one looks at the spatial length of the bunch during acceleration.

In eq. 14, the authors should specify if Ei is the electrostatic field only, or it is the total electric field including both the electrostatic field and the field due to space charge.

Page 12, 1st paragraph in Sec. III, what are "electron cancellation effects"? Also, please consider describing briefly the PIC simulation, including the number of particles, simulation domain, cell size, time-step size, etc.

It is recommended to state explicitly which equations in Sec. II are used to generate the plots in Figs. 5-12.

The results from PIC simulations are compared with theory only in Figs. 8 and10, but not in Figs. 5, 7, 9, 11, and 12. It would be great if PIC simulations can be presented in all these figures. If this is not possible, it is recommended to explain why PIC simulations data are missing in these figures.

Figure 6, what initial velocity distribution (Gaussian? Uniform? Or Linear?) is assumed for the calculation? Only the energy difference between the electrons in the front and the back is stated as 0.1eV, but how about the velocities of the electrons inside the bunch? Also, it is not very clear about the electron bunch's initial density profile. Similar clarifications are needed for Figs. 8 and 10.

p. 16, Sec C. "Theory analysis was performed still using coulomb MF model presented in II. B ...". So it seems that the theory in Sec. II. C is never used?

p. 16, 2nd last sentence. "Finally, the pulse duration increases linearly with time." But Fig. 10 shows a clear non-linear increase of pulse duration with time.
回复此楼
求助大神
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

wojiaozjf

新虫 (初入文坛)

各位大神请指教啊………………
/////');">
求助大神
2楼2015-09-13 19:14:11
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

xiaopang8958

铁杆木虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
编辑选择拒稿,楼主要是想申诉可以写信申诉一下,要是不行只能改投了!祝好!

发自小木虫Android客户端
/////');">
3楼2015-09-13 19:59:35
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

wojiaozjf

新虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
3楼: Originally posted by xiaopang8958 at 2015-09-13 19:59:35
编辑选择拒稿,楼主要是想申诉可以写信申诉一下,要是不行只能改投了!祝好!

大神,怎么申诉?是针对审稿人的意见逐条改么?申诉是给编辑还是审稿人?

发自小木虫Android客户端
/////');">
求助大神
4楼2015-09-14 01:38:05
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

wangyaru91

新虫 (初入文坛)

你的文章投了多久之后给你回复的呀?
/////');">
5楼2016-05-04 15:30:28
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 wojiaozjf 的主题更新
不应助 确定回帖应助 (注意:应助才可能被奖励,但不允许灌水,必须填写15个字符以上)
最具人气热帖推荐 [查看全部] 作者 回/看 最后发表
[职场人生] 该不该带研究生 +9 越走越远 2021-01-17 11/550 2021-01-22 23:33 by 飘零的叶子2
[考博] 博士双非院校,值得去读吗? +10 133456 2021-01-21 20/1000 2021-01-22 23:32 by 飘零的叶子2
[考研] 求有学校能收调剂 数学二150 因为英语可能过不了报考学校的单科线所以求调剂 +4 wyh788111 2021-01-21 5/250 2021-01-22 23:03 by 我是新新呀
[硕博家园] 工作和学生真不一样 +9 milk66girl 2021-01-22 13/650 2021-01-22 22:19 by 远方有多远H
[博后之家] 苏州系统医学研究所2021年招聘 +3 fkbds 2021-01-16 3/150 2021-01-22 22:11 by asdfsh
[考研] 保守估分340求调剂,已发表SCI一作三篇(四区,二区,二区top) +9 2890363657 2021-01-22 17/850 2021-01-22 22:07 by 2890363657
[基金申请] 又到写基金本子的时候了,赋诗一首,为大家解压 (金币+6) +18 aloesnow 2021-01-21 21/1050 2021-01-22 17:35 by yanxuexue
[基金申请] 请问各位兄弟姐妹:可以把自己以前未中的国自然标书小修之后重新投吗? +3 HIMI123 2021-01-22 4/200 2021-01-22 17:33 by yanxuexue
[生物科学] 细胞培养咋避免污染呐 +5 牙科赵医生 2021-01-19 5/250 2021-01-22 12:13 by jurkat.1640
[论文投稿] 论文投稿成功后,没有收到投稿成功邮件! +6 野路 2021-01-17 6/300 2021-01-22 11:26 by Katherine7
[找工作] 粮食大省唯一双一流学校与惟一双一流学科选择 +12 woaiwoffff 2021-01-20 17/850 2021-01-22 11:07 by woaiwoffff
[硕博家园] 想找对象发现积分不够哈哈 +21 milk66girl 2021-01-19 24/1200 2021-01-22 10:34 by 转身落泪的我
[高分子] 胶粘剂 +4 徐长安 2021-01-19 5/250 2021-01-21 20:30 by sjzhu2007
[基金申请] 关于联合基金申报 +3 li1luo2 2021-01-21 4/200 2021-01-21 17:26 by jurkat.1640
[论文投稿] 关于required reviews completed这个状态 +3 郑郑郑一 2021-01-18 7/350 2021-01-21 15:49 by 郑郑郑一
[硕博家园] 求大佬推荐2021还有名额的电化学博导 +7 数据分析1 2021-01-18 12/600 2021-01-21 15:25 by whilst
[公派出国] 没有论文出去公派的可能性大吗 +6 勇敢的心啊 2021-01-19 6/300 2021-01-21 12:16 by 72711huang
[硕博家园] 读博申请 +10 文文清清 2021-01-16 10/500 2021-01-21 05:22 by cheche2017
[论文投稿] 求助状态的意思 +7 城口的木匠 2021-01-16 8/400 2021-01-18 14:51 by Joan王大大
[考研] 哈工大毕业,化工/物理化学一志愿清华320左右,希望能调剂相关电化学/材料课题组 +3 mis_cot 2021-01-17 3/150 2021-01-18 09:37 by 梦想,,
信息提示
请填处理意见