各位牛人来帮我分析分析，三个月前投的PCCP，一个反对，两个要求修改再说
各位牛人来帮我看看，三个月前投的Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics，今天终于给我回信了。总共有三个审稿人的意见，大致意思如下：
第一个审稿人的主要观点：However, the manuscript might be out of the scope of Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics (PCCP). The authors have not discussed detailed chemical or physical aspects of the investigated solids, a useful comparison with experimental results is lacking in the present paper. 然后列举了一些问题，最后I do not recommend this manuscript for publication in the PCCP.
第二个审稿人的主要观点： This manuscript is well organized and the conclusion is reasonable. I suggest the acceptance of this manuscript after addressing the following point. 后面列了三条整改措施（比较好对付）
第三个审稿人的主要观点：I therefore cannot recommend the publication of the manuscript in the present form. I encourage authors to resubmit the manuscript to the Physical Chemistry Chemica Physics journal after properly addressing previous referees' observations and the following ones:
后面列了十一条整改措施（迄今为止遇到的最多的一次，而且都比较犀利）。
编辑的意思：Therefore it has been rejected in its current form.However, if you are able to fully address the concerns raised by the reviewers in the reports below, I will consider a substantially rewritten manuscript which takes into account all of the reviewers’ comments. If you choose to resubmit your manuscript, please include a point by point response to the reviewers’ comments and highlight the changes you have made.
诸位有没有投过PCCP或碰到类似情况的，帮我寻思一下：第一名审稿人的意见是反对的。如果我按照第二和第三审稿人的要求修改了，达到了他们的要求，那中的概率大吗？”2：1就能赢吗？
返回小木虫查看更多
京公网安备 11010802022153号
撞运气吧，修改好了还是可以中的，编辑没有完全拒绝就说明文章还有戏
好
谢谢安�
，
！