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 pdong1991 的 6 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

pdong1991

新虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 17.5
帖子: 15
在线: 4.9小时
虫号: 3864418
注册: 2015-05-12
专业: 光学

[交流] 第一次英文投稿返回来Reject&Resubmit，求助大神。

编辑的意见如下，好像意思是修改重新投？：
The reviewer(s) would like to see some revisions made to your manuscript before it can be reconsidered for publication. If you choose to resubmit, your paper will be reconsidered, but as though it is a new paper.  Therefore, I invite you to respond to the reviewer(s)\' comments, revise and re-submit your manuscript.  It is my expectation that you change everything as suggested by the reviewers, including the possibility of doing additional experiments, or provide clear and cogent arguments why you did not make the changes.  Also, please fix the English.

When you revise your manuscript please highlight the changes you make in the manuscript by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or coloured text.  In addition, please upload a document that lists each comment of each reviewer together with your answer for each comment.

Because we are trying to facilitate timely publication of manuscripts submitted to Spectroscopy Letters, your revised manuscript should be uploaded as soon as possible.  If it is not possible for you to submit your revision in a reasonable
amount of time, we may have to consider your paper as a new submission.

Once again, thank you for submitting your manuscript to xx  and I look forward to receiving your revision.

审稿人1意见（只截取了评论部分，介绍文章内容的就没放上来了）：
The issue is important and interesting, though, lack of necessary experiments serves as the proof of the proposed method.
The English is a bit obscure, the manuscript  is suggested to be re-edited by a native English speaker.
后面具体四点意见；

审稿2：
In order to improve the manuscript, the authors might consider the following points: 后面四点具体意见

审稿人3：主要给了我几篇最近的文献让我引用？？？
This paper mainly xx. This topic is interesting and the results are convincing. Thus, I would recommend publication with the following minor revisions.

审稿4：
As such, my overall recommendation is “major revision”. My comments are listed below, and they are mostly of a clarification nature.后面四点意见

求助！！！认真修改有戏吗？

回复此楼