| 查看: 1752 | 回复: 5 | ||
| 【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题，作者howardloveme将赠送您 5 个金币 | ||
[求助]
哪位大神帮忙看一下审稿人意见，本人英语水平有限，怕误解了意思
|
||
|
咬牙投了一个四区的SCI（英文版）,现在反悔审稿人修改意见，建议大修。怕自己理解的不对，闹了笑话，哪位大神帮帮忙看一下啊，审稿意见如下： 1. The paper claims in the abstract that the results are of "reference value for relevant experimental research," but in that case greater attention needs to be paid to the anticipated accuracy of the results, and the uncertainties. For example, it can be seen in Table I that many more significant figures are quoted than have actually converged as a function of basis set size. The convergence uncertainty should be included in the tables. 这个意见是让我把表格里有效数字少取几位的意思吗？还是要写出误差啊？我这个是纯理论的结果，没有误差可以对比呀？  2. It is not clear how the QED corrections were calculated, or what the uncertainty is in this term. A simple one-electron approximation is used (see discussion at the end of Sect. II), but the authors do not give any details beyond a reference to Bethe and Salpeter's book. What was the actual formula used? It is likely that not more than one significant figure is significant in comparison with experimental data due to (i) screening corrections, (ii) higher-order corrections, and (iii) electron-electron QED corrections (e.g. the Araki-Sucher Q-term) that are not included. In this range of nuclear charge, (Z alpha) is no longer a small parameter. 这个也是让求QED的误差吗？ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
295求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
一志愿C9的化学工程（085602） 340分，感觉校内调剂无望，求调剂
已经有9人回复
-
070300化学求调剂
已经有16人回复
-
363求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
283分求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
材料化工306分找合适调剂
已经有7人回复
-
一志愿北京化工085600 310分求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
292求调剂
已经有9人回复
-
调剂
已经有4人回复
-
一志愿9材料学硕297已过六级求调剂推荐
已经有5人回复
|
本帖内容被屏蔽 |
2楼2018-10-22 19:08:06
3楼2018-10-23 20:21:07
|
本帖内容被屏蔽 |
4楼2018-10-23 22:32:53
5楼2018-10-27 20:38:38
6楼2018-11-18 03:07:57
