Dear XXX:

I have received the reviewers’ comments for your paper, appended below. In view of the comments I cannot accept your paper for publication in the Journal of the Optical Society of America A.

A paper is acceptable for publication in JOSA A only if the reviewers are convinced that, in addition to being correct technically, it also adds a new and important result to the field.  The reviewers did not find that your paper meets this criterion.  

Thank you for submitting your paper to JOSA A.  I regret that it is not possible to send you a more favorable report on this manuscript, and I hope that you will continue to consider JOSA A for future submissions.

Sincerely,
Fabrizio Frezza
Topical Editor, JOSA A

---------------------------
Reviewer 1:
General
The paper presents a novel method to determine the XXX. The topic is of interest and the technical part of the paper is well written. The manuscript could be considered for publication in JOSA A after solving the English issues and the remarks provided bellow.
1) ~15)条非常具体的修改意见. In conclusion, I think the paper could be considered for publishing, but only after major revisions and resubmission, in JOSA A.
Reviewer 2:
Authors propose XXX. I don’t think it is useful because it hard to XXX. Because of the XXX, there are many XXX. Since XXX is nonuniform, when the wave with finite size is incident to XXX, the output wave will diverge.
第二个专家审稿时间自己拖了近20天，期间被编辑催了两次。
请问我是大修重投，还是改投呢，谢谢！ 返回小木虫查看更多