当前位置: 首页 > 论文投稿 >这样的情况---拒稿后还能重投吗?请有经验的帮忙看看!

这样的情况---拒稿后还能重投吗?请有经验的帮忙看看!

作者 zhuzhanlong
来源: 小木虫 1000 20 举报帖子
+关注

这样的情况---拒稿后还能重投吗?请大家帮忙看看。
Ms. Ref. No.:  SIGPRO-D-19-00262R1
Title: Two-paths hybrid algorithm for segmenting image of unequal cluster sizes based on chaos optimization and improved fuzzy c-means
Signal Processing

Dear Dr. zhu,

Reviewers' comments on your work have now been received. You will see that Reviewer #2 has some critical concerns about the correctness of some equations and is advising against publication of your work. Therefore I must reject it.

For your guidance, I append the reviewers' comments below.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider your work.

Yours sincerely,

Luís Ducla Soares, PhD
Handling Editor
Signal Processing

********************************************************





Reviewers' comments:


Reviewer #1: For most of the comments previously,the author did rethink many aspects of them and have made a response.
1.It has been made an appropriate deletion of section 2 ("Background works&quot. It is more clear to see related works.
2.The author made a simple explanation on the difference among those four chaotic equations. The author also made further
explanations in the following part.
3.The author have re-created the parameter list in Table 3, and made a detailed explanation on it. In some extant, it is explained why those parameters were chosen.
4.After the author's explanation, the ground truth images of the NDT images are available to get now.
5.The word "Evolutionary computation" now is more suitable than "Artificial intelligence".

In general, the paper re-submitted is better than original version.



Reviewer #2: I'm glad to see that this manuscript has been improved extensively and majority of my concerns have been responded reasonably. However, I still have several major issues disclosed below:

Major comments:

1. The authors have showed the deduced process of formula (20), from which I find something wrong. I cannot get formula (16) according to my analysis when taking the partial derivative of L with respect to uij. Perhaps they made a confusion about subscripts i and j in uij and L. Try to use different subscripts rather than i and j, and re-deduce the minimization process of formula (15).

2. As mentioned above, their experimental results are no longer convincing. However, I still want to make some comments on results of syn1 and syn2. These two images are perhaps more suitable to test the robustness to noises of one algorithm.

Minor comments:

In Tab 4 and 5, maximum values of a merit should be written in special format (eg. bold type) to facilitate readers.


以上是编辑的信息,我全封不动地贴在这里了。 返回小木虫查看更多

今日热帖
  • 精华评论
  • zhuzhanlong

    引用回帖:
    7楼: Originally posted by 呆萌大熊 at 2019-06-07 20:43:46
    按要求修改,重投可以的。我遇到过类似情况

    你的情况是,编辑拒绝的信件也没有提重投这事吗?

  • zhuzhanlong

    引用回帖:
    11楼: Originally posted by 沧海臻宥 at 2019-06-07 21:01:38
    一般第二个审稿人的这种意见我在一审有遇到过,这种明显拒稿的意见一般都是你那方向的大牛。如果想试试,建议完全按照审稿人的意思改下,再说点好话还是有可能的,每个审稿人还是对科研工作者比较友善的
    ...

    确实,我的这个论文在第一次审稿,大修时,第二个审稿人的意见中有一条我没有完全按照他的来。目前来看,不得不回头按原意见修改了,唉

  • zhangzhencsu

    别投了,如果不想浪费时间和精力

  • aaa45688123

    未经编辑邀请重投是不道德的

猜你喜欢
下载小木虫APP
与700万科研达人随时交流
  • 二维码
  • IOS
  • 安卓