24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

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

逍遥客89

新虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 52.9
帖子: 41
在线: 16.8小时
虫号: 7859193
注册: 2018-02-01
专业: 管理科学与工程

[交流] 第一次投稿SCI期刊，这是编辑的回复，各位大神谁给分析一下是没有机会了吗已有20人参与

编辑的回复如下：

I am writing to let you know that, after a careful editorial reading, we do not feel that your paper is suitable for publication in Physica A, and we will not therefore send it for further review. We emphasize that this decision has nothing to do with the quality of your work, nor  its presentation. On the contrary, we feel that by taking this decision we are protecting your interests by precluding a lengthy review process that would likely not lead to acceptance.

The basis of our decision is as follows.

It has become increasingly apparent in the last few years that the centre of gravity of the journal has moved in such a manner that some topics are now not significantly represented in it.

In our experience,  some papers, whose fields are not well represented in the journal, have difficulty in obtaining expert reviews, incurring very long delays along the way. This situation is clearly unsatisfactory for both the Authors and Editors, and we now wish to avoid otherwise excellent work being drawn into such a process.

We conclude that the journal should not try to serve all possible arenas, but (while remaining quite broad) we should focus sufficiently to ensure that a high quality of service is delivered to our Authors and Readers in those arenas. Obviously Physica A has in the past published several (too many in my opinion) papers around this theme.

We hope that you understand our reasons for the decision. We also emphasize that this is in no way a reflection on the quality of your work on a variation of epidemic models for rumor spreading by information/rumor suppression or manipulation as presented in this paper, and indeed, we would welcome future submissions from you that seem closer to the main interest of the journal.

回复此楼