当前位置: 首页 > 论文投稿 >数学论文,审稿人的意见没看懂,求助

数学论文,审稿人的意见没看懂,求助

作者 whjwd
来源: 小木虫 350 7 举报帖子
+关注

投了一篇论文,审稿意见有这样一段:
the denominator in (2.7) decreases, bu the author fails to show that this expression does not vanish in the interval (0,1). without this the assertion in line 37 is not valid.
论文中的相关内容如下:
(2.7)[latex]\frac{g_1'(x)}{g_2'(x)}=\frac{1}{2(p+1)xcot x-(x^2-4p+2)}[/latex]
it is not difficult to verify that the function  [latex]x cot x[/latex] is strictly decreasing
on (0,1). hence (2.7) implies that the quotient [latex]\frac{g_1'(x)}{g_2'(x)}[/latex] is strictly increasing in (0; 1).
accordingly, from lemma 2.1 and (2.6), it is deduced that the ratio [latex]\frac{g_1(x)}{g_2(x)}[/latex] is strictly
increasing in (0; 1).
没读懂上面的审稿意见,求助大家,审稿人是什么意思? 返回小木虫查看更多

今日热帖
  • 精华评论
  • ruileelucky

    加油

  • ballhall

    不太懂,(2.7)在区间(0,1)的确是减小了,是需要证明分母趋向于无穷?不懂

  • 新城子曾

    字面意思,要看你的论文到底在写什么

  • whjwd

    引用回帖:
    5楼: Originally posted by 新城子曾 at 2020-11-22 09:19:38
    字面意思,要看你的论文到底在写什么

    论文中的内容在帖子中有,针对前面的(2.7),审稿人说but the author fails to show that this expression does not vanish in the interval (0,1).就是这句话让我验证什么呢

  • 新城子曾

    引用回帖:
    6楼: Originally posted by whjwd at 2020-11-22 09:33:27
    论文中的内容在帖子中有,针对前面的(2.7),审稿人说but the author fails to show that this expression does not vanish in the interval (0,1).就是这句话让我验证什么呢...

    不等于0

  • 新城子曾

    引用回帖:
    6楼: Originally posted by whjwd at 2020-11-22 09:33:27
    论文中的内容在帖子中有,针对前面的(2.7),审稿人说but the author fails to show that this expression does not vanish in the interval (0,1).就是这句话让我验证什么呢...

    不等于0,数学中的vanish 一般指等于0

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