编辑意见：

Dear Authors,

One reviewer still feels there is not new material being presented. In your response/revision, please explain exactly what is novel/new about the material. When doing so, keep in mind that the paper may still be declined if this is not felt to be a compelling enough argument.

Regards,
Editor

审稿人意见：

Reviewer #1: The authors have addressed the questions and comments from the reviewer. I recommend the paper for publication.


Reviewer #2: It does not have new results needed for publication in JSE. The paper is much better suited for a journal on engineering application. Therefore, I must reject your paper for publication in JSE.


Reviewer #4: All comments the reviewer cared has been clarified in revised version, I recommend it to be accepted and published in this journal.

，

那就说明哪里是新的，说详细点儿

可能是理论创新不足，偏向于应用

显然是第一轮审稿人同意了，但编辑没看上这篇文章！所以，尽量去说服编辑吧