24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

【有奖交流】积极回复本帖子，参与交流，就有机会分得作者好人已注册的 16 个金币

当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖

好人已注册

新虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 144
散金: 4
帖子: 6
在线: 18.8小时
虫号: 2739681
注册: 2013-10-20
专业: 电力系统

[交流] IET GTD reject with resubmit是否需要改投征询大家意见

今年1月份向IET Generation Transmission & Distribution 投了一篇综述文章,本月编辑返回了评审意见如下：
Thank you for submitting your paper to IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution. The peer review process is now complete. The referees and I feel that your paper requires significantly more work and is not acceptable for publication in its current form. My decision is therefore to decline your paper with encouragement to submit a substantially revised paper. I appreciate that this decision will be a disappointment, but hope that you find the referees' comments (given below) useful in improving your paper.

Reviewer: 1
Comments to the Author
This manuscript reviewed the recent research on MMC in the aspects of topology, modeling, modulation technique, control etc.
My comments on the submitted article are the following:
1. The manuscript is poorly written. There are lots of grammar mistakes and some of the sentences are too too long. Almost the whole second paragraph of Introduction section is a duplicate of the abstract. The writing quality should be well improved.
2. This manuscript listed lots of other people’s previous work, however, it lacks of summary and conclusive statement.

Reviewer: 2
Comments to the Author
Dear authors,
-How is the paper different from the following MMC review paper?
S. Debnath, J. Qin, B. Bahrani, M. Saeedifard and P. Barbosa, "Operation, Control, and Applications of the Modular Multilevel Converter: A Review," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 37-53, Jan. 2015.
The above paper also presents a review of the topology, modelling, control of MMC and has not even been cited in the submitted manuscript. The authors should add something not present in the above paper that would help the readers.

-The last 4 lines in the abstract and introduction have been exactly repeated. Please use different sentences.

-Please cite the correct reference in the text where required. In Section 3.2, all references numbers have been incorrectly cited. Please read through them and make the corrections. The same is also true in later Sections.

Reviewer: 3
Comments to the Author
Dear authors, the language requires additional proof-reading. There are many typos, grammatical and syntax mistakes.
The purpose of the paper is not clearly identified by the reviewer.
Please be aware, that the topic of MMC research is considered too big and too extensive to be covered by one single journal publication. It is thereby strongly recommended to set an appropriate focus on one or multiple aspects instead and to present these clearly and in a more detailed way. Otherwise important details are at risk to be neglected. The already made considerations can be implemented offhand.
The formatting is also characterized by mistakes and insufficient proofreading, such as captions, placement of figures and doubling of references ([17], p. 5).

除了语言写作上的问题，感觉几个审稿人的意见都很负面，尤其是第三个审稿人的意见好像几乎要推翻重写，所以在犹豫修改后重投还是改投到其他期刊。
请有经验的同志给点参考意见，十分感谢！

回复此楼