| 查看: 3372 | 回复: 5 | ||
[求助]
IEEE Trans. Smart Gid 一审意见 录用几率大吗？ 已有2人参与
|
|
After careful review we have determined that your paper might be of interest for publication in the IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, after revisions, if those revisions fully and properly address the concerns of the reviewers. The comments from the reviewers appearing below may include specific revisions that are mandatory and other changes suggested. You may have to make broader changes if necessary based on general comments provided by the reviewers. I wish to emphasize that this is not a conditional acceptance. It is, rather, a recognition by our reviewers and editors that your paper merits some interest. The reviewers of the original draft will be approached to assess the revised manuscript; at the discretion of the editor, additional reviewers may be included. Please submit your revised paper within 60 days of receiving this letter. After 60 days the revision will expire and you will need to submit your manuscript as a new paper submission. We encourage you to include an explanation of how you responded to the comments by the reviewers to help expedite our review. Please include this explanation in the space provided for "response to reviewers" and "response to editor" when you upload the revision. Please note that you should submit your revised paper following the latest author's guidelines (We have had direct author upload since January 7, 2002). See the Author's Kit on: www.ieee.org/organizations/society/power/subpages/authors.html Also, directions are contained at the end of this email. WE ARE AUTOMATICALLY INFORMED WHEN YOU UPLOAD YOUR REVISION AND RESPONSES SO PLEASE DO NOT SEND EMAIL TO ME THAT YOU SUBMITTED YOUR PAPER, AND PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME YOUR PAPER AS EMAIL ATTACHMENT. Sincerely, Dr. Jianhui Wang Editor in Chief, Transactions on Smart Grid COMMENTS TO THE AUTHORS: Editor's Comments: Editor Comments to the Author: The reviewers raised concerns on the system models studied in the proposed research including the modelling details of the power electronics interface which has serious impact on the efficacy of the proposed method as claimed. The presentation is very poor and the paper needs re-writing in many places. Reviewer 1 提出了4条意见； Reviewer 2 提出了10条意见； Reviewer 3 提出了8条意见。 这个应该算大修，请问这样录用的概率多大？ I wish to emphasize that this is not a conditional acceptance.到底是什么意思？是说即便根据审稿人和主编的意见修改，文章也可能被拒吗？ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
自荐读博
已经有8人回复
-
投稿Elsevier的杂志（返修），总是在选择OA和subscription界面被踢皮球
已经有8人回复
-
自然科学基金委宣布启动申请书“瘦身提质”行动
已经有4人回复
-
求个博导看看
已经有18人回复
★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
liouzhan654: 金币+2, 感谢交流 2017-01-30 16:27:02
han.bw: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2017-04-01 15:56:07
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
liouzhan654: 金币+2, 感谢交流 2017-01-30 16:27:02
han.bw: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2017-04-01 15:56:07
 本帖仅楼主可见 |
2楼2017-01-30 16:11:20
3楼2017-01-30 16:58:20
peterflyer 
木虫之王 (文学泰斗)
peterflyer
- 应助: 20282 (院士)
- 金币: 145890
- 红花: 1374
- 帖子: 93089
- 在线: 7693.9小时
- 虫号: 1482829
- 注册: 2011-11-08
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 功能陶瓷
4楼2017-01-30 22:35:33
5楼2017-01-31 14:26:07
6楼2017-01-31 23:36:00