| 查看: 2726 | 回复: 5 | ||
| 【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题，作者三流作者将赠送您 5 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 | ||
三流作者金虫 (正式写手)
|
[求助]
Optical Engineering投稿被拒，两个评审意见相差很大，有必要申诉吗？
|
|
|
以下为编辑拒稿信： The reviewers of the manuscript you submitted find that, although your work appears to be correct, the specific subject is not appropriate for Optical Engineering. After careful thought, I have decided to follow their recommendation. The reviewers' comments are included below. Perhaps they will be of help in finding a more appropriate journal for your work. I regret having to decline your manuscript. I appreciate the time and effort required to carry out this type of study. 以下为评审意见： Reviewer Comments: Reviewer #1 Evaluations: Appropriateness for OE: Good Quality of writing: Good Clarity: Good Conciseness: Satisfactory References to literature: Good Relevance of figures: Good Originality: Good Significance of results: Good Technical accuracy of results: Marginal Rigor: Satisfactory Detail level of procedures: Good Substantiation of conclusions: Satisfactory Reviewer #1 (Reviewer Comments Required): It is quite interesting paper, however I would recommend that you revise conclusion. There are sentences(form and length), which could be generally used in the discussion parts. ……后面提了一些中肯的问题和修改意见 Reviewer #2 Evaluations: Appropriateness for OE: Satisfactory Quality of writing: Satisfactory Clarity: Satisfactory Conciseness: Satisfactory References to literature: Satisfactory Relevance of figures: Poor Originality: Satisfactory Significance of results: Marginal Technical accuracy of results: Satisfactory Rigor: Poor Detail level of procedures: Marginal Substantiation of conclusions: Marginal Reviewer #2 (Reviewer Comments Required): The structure to built a simple and mobile laser scanner is the only strong point of the research. The paper is too poor and the gives few examples to test the accuracy of the new tool. Then is not evaluated so much for mobile purpose and indoor to make a correct comparison with SLAM 。 我论文提到了SLAM，但是第二个评审提到的跟slam对比啥的beyond the scope of our paper，没提什么跟论文相关的问题，不知道他有没有认真看一遍论文……可能是我给自己挖了个坑，送审的时候送到了做slam的人手里，然而那并不是我的内容啊。。。 我给编辑发了个申诉信，死马当活马医了，不行就修改重投或改投了，网上之前没看到过这个期刊的申诉案例，第一次投外国期刊，不知道大家有何高见？ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
基金不中，共勉
已经有8人回复
-
基金未中，这种答复是模板吗？
已经有5人回复
-
为什么资助数各大高校都创新高，自己申请怎么就这么难
已经有5人回复
-
有多少人是今天查系统知道结果的？
已经有17人回复
-
导师吐槽：我怎么摊上了这么个极品研究生！
已经有5人回复
-
怎么看青基中了没有啊
已经有5人回复
-
梦想
已经有3人回复
-
面上合作单位盖章
已经有3人回复
-
看板上这么多中的，有点像50人群里49个人都是骗子的那种感觉……
已经有5人回复
-
为什么 国际(地区)合作与交流项目 没有放榜？
已经有11人回复
三流作者
金虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 1 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 1115.7
- 散金: 111
- 帖子: 323
- 在线: 79.6小时
- 虫号: 4258533
- 注册: 2015-12-01
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 导航、制导与传感技术
3楼2017-06-24 14:17:22
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
2楼2017-06-21 13:11:19
|
祝福 发自小木虫IOS客户端 |
4楼2017-06-24 23:34:24
5楼2017-06-25 16:29:11
