| 查看: 2255 | 回复: 11 | |||
| 【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题，作者小强博士将赠送您 50 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 | |||
小强博士新虫 (著名写手)
|
[求助]
关于投稿 已有2人参与
|
||
|
头一天投稿，第二天主编就提了7条意见让大修，主编本人也做过相关领领域的研究，还让对比参考他的一篇文章！下面是给的意见，求助各位有经验的虫子，这篇文章还有戏吗？ I looked into your paper and decided to ask you for several amendments before sending it to full review. 1.You describe the first step of QFD as constructing the house of quality where in fact, the HOQ is one of the 7 QFD tools but not the first. Presenting QFD as a process of using 4 matrices is also a limitation of the original approach. Check this https://asq.org/learn-about-qual ... rview/overview.html or https://asq.org/learn-about-qual ... rview/overview.html as readily available descriptions but find an academic source that describe QFD properly and not as in many of the derived papers that carry the error endlessly. 2.Are you familiar with Reich, Y., & Levy, E. (2004). Managing product design quality under resource constraints. International Journal of Production Research, 42(13), 2555-2572? It proposes a different way to prioritize EC to maximize the quality of the product. Does it have any relation to your approach? Can your approach lead to maximizing the quality of the product? How? 3.Franceschini (2015) should be Franceschini et al. (2015) 4.Your analysis of the consistency with only l, j, and k ignores significant information about them that comes from their relative position with other CRs. It might be only chance that you got the results as you did in this case study. Is there another way to test it? Is there a "correct" ordering? 5.Using this example to state that your approach "has an obvious advantage" is not supported. Can you provide better empirical evidence? For example, can you create 3-5 other cases and present how you generated them and test again? 6.Computational complexity is usually determined based on the dependence of the number of computational steps with respect to n – number of characteristic parameters; here it could be number of CR or number of respondents or both. Merely stating the number of steps on one problem is irrelevant. Can you offer another way to support this claim? This could also be resolved analytically by showing the details of the algorithm and going through it carefully. It could also be addressed empirically. 7.Since executing the algorithm takes fraction of a second, what is the relevance of efficiency? How many CRs are you expecting to have in a large problem? What is the largest that you encountered ever? It is better to provide data and merely state some concussions that have no practical value. 发自小木虫Android客户端 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
2026国自然函评费到账
已经有17人回复
-
让我中一个面上吧！
已经有15人回复
-
2026年的国家社科基金项目通讯评审的新规则与新动向、新挑战
已经有5人回复
-
跳槽后在研项目怎么办？
已经有10人回复
-
什么时候开奖？
已经有10人回复
-
今天放榜吗？
已经有16人回复
-
93BebMhtakh前后11位开头都是大写
已经有8人回复
-
范进中举一文的中心思想
已经有4人回复
-
只有每年这种时候来逛逛小木虫
已经有26人回复
-
filecode，4个jtjc了
已经有16人回复
fhg155093180
新虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 389.3
- 散金: 439
- 红花: 2
- 帖子: 394
- 在线: 206.6小时
- 虫号: 3400072
- 注册: 2014-09-05
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 常微分方程与动力系统
5楼2017-04-29 13:08:37
eiri
新虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 84 (初中生)
- 金币: 7620.3
- 散金: 3915
- 红花: 85
- 帖子: 8708
- 在线: 436.1小时
- 虫号: 4209911
- 注册: 2015-11-10
- 专业: 微观经济学
小强博士2楼2017-04-29 10:36:03
小强博士
新虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 2 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 7048.6
- 散金: 1186
- 红花: 2
- 帖子: 2254
- 在线: 133.7小时
- 虫号: 5348800
- 注册: 2016-12-13
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 决策理论与方法
3楼2017-04-29 11:03:40
paperhunter
荣誉版主 (文学泰斗)
还没想好
-
专家经验: +14 - SEPI: 1
- 应助: 14603 (教授)
- 贵宾: 11.659
- 金币: 345467
- 散金: 9262
- 红花: 1423
- 沙发: 2016
- 帖子: 127554
- 在线: 8880.5小时
- 虫号: 971012
- 注册: 2010-03-14
- 专业: 环境工程
- 管辖: 论文投稿
4楼2017-04-29 11:20:38
40