第一次投sci,审稿意见意图求分析
Reviewers' comments:
Editor:We manage to find just one expert available for reviewing the authors manuscript. In order to speed up the revision process, we decided to take a decision. The authors must follow all the comments of the reviewer and improve the overall quality of the manuscript
请问这句话的意思是不能反驳审稿人的意见吗?
Reviewer #1: The authors propose a new metaheuristic (called Car Tracking Optimization Algorithm) that finds inspiration from the behavior of other algorithms.
The subject addressed is coherent with the aims of the journal but the way of presenting the work needs several improvements.
It is in general very hard to follow the work. Therefore, I do not recommend the publication of the work in this form in a high level journal like SOFT COMPUTING.
这句话的意思是说我的文章整体结构有问题,需要改结构吗?
In the following, some major/minor comments are given to the authors.
Major comments:
Originality and significance:
The topic of the paper has to be better clarified in the introduction. In this form, it is very hard to follow the concepts, to understand the real contribution etc. Originality and significance have to be highlighted. For example, through a series of bullets, the contributions can be listed and described in the introduction.
Presentation:
1) the paper contains several grammatical errors and it is strongly suggested to proofreader it very carefully.
2)It seems to me that the proposed metaheuristic is very similar to the Ant Colony Optimization. Although the authors mention it, they should spend more time to better clarify the differences and the shared aspects.
3) It is not clear the setting of the input parameters.
这个意见我认为我的文章里已经讲清楚了输入参数的设置,但是审稿人说不清楚怎么办?
4) from the results shown in the tables, it is not highlighted the behavior, on average, of each of the algorithms compared.
这句话的意思是说我的算法跟其他算法比较不是很突出吗?
For example, it seems to me that the proposed algorithm doesn't perform better than the others for what concerns the CPU time required. Is it right?
Some Minor comments:
Since the performance of these algorithms PRESENTS
Car Tracking optimization Algorithm (CTA)
Rephrase:
We can put an end to the law of these algorithms by studying these optimization algorithms
In these swarm intelligence optimization algorithms, particle swarm algorithm
For the basic parameters of all algorithms, including population size, the maximum number of function evaluations are same.
返回小木虫查看更多
京公网安备 11010802022153号
1,属于套话,只有一个审稿意见,请按意见修改;
2,文章整体水平要提高;
3,In the following, some major/minor comments are given to the authors.
每一条都高修改,没有例外;
祝顺利!
请问对于第三点意见和第四点你怎么看,第三点意见我认为文章已经把输入参数说明清楚了,但是审稿人却不认为这样,同时因为文章里的参数很多,审稿意见里的参数没有具体指是哪些参数没有讲清楚,还有第四点我不是很清楚这句话表达的是什么意思,说我的算法跟其他算法比较不是很突出吗?还望虫友帮我分析下
,
3, 输入参数的设置不详细,这个具体不了解你的这个方向;是设置的原因why、设置的过程How...没有阐明清晰?
4, 比较结果,看不出突出的优势;
在introduction里面最后一段简单综述现有方法的缺陷,指出为何需要提出改进
找个靠谱的,跟你方向相同的,重新润色一下你的稿子。估计语法问题太多,reviewer不懂你的意思。rephrase,基本就是说没有描述得当
参数为什么这样设置,有引用?有解释?
讨论你的算法有什么优越之处?
尽管我不同你的专业,但是,对于稿人的任何意见都要认真对待