24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 561  |  回复: 1

hl89119924

至尊木虫 (职业作家)

123

[求助] 微晶玻璃方面审稿意见求助

各位虫子好,本人上次投了一篇玻璃陶瓷的论文,审稿人给出了一个审稿意见,实在看不懂,就按自己理解的意思改了下,审稿意见如下:
Reviewer #2: The work of "synthesis, structure and properties of MgO-Al2O3-SiO2-B2O3 transparent glass-ceramics" is mostly experimental in nature and devoted to the study of glass-ceramic systems based on oxides of silicon and boron.
In the study of work, I would highlight the following drawback. The absence of a fundamental theory. Experimental data confirming the properties of the system under study is given in full. However, the study of ceramics-forming systems containing two or more stekloobrazovaniya requires serious theoretical justification. The authors can be published, however, I'd recommend adding a theoretical justification tracked in spectroscopy patterns for the studied system. Moreover, all of them basically fit into the concept of a Stanworth(Homopolar connection concept).

按照审稿意见本人添加了好多理论部分,然后审稿人审完后又返回来一个让人看不懂的意见,如下:
Reviewer #2: Recommend that the authors mention in the article the minimum theoretical rationale for the observed experimental regularities in the studied amorphous matrix.

这个实在不知道怎么改了,投稿加修改都折腾了半年了,有没有做玻璃陶瓷方面的虫友帮忙看看审稿人到底是几个意思,谢谢了。
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

dlf_1990

银虫 (初入文坛)

再多引几篇文献,用文献中的理论去解释实验现象。比如你的光谱数据,可能缺乏理论支撑。
NEVERTOOLATE.
2楼2017-12-13 23:28:23
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 hl89119924 的主题更新
信息提示
请填处理意见