| ²é¿´: 2604 | »Ø¸´: 6 | |||
lkd-syl½ð³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
´¬³¤
|
[½»Á÷]
¾Ü¸åºÁÎÞÀåÍ·£¬¸ù±¾²»ÖªµÀËûÃÇÒª±í´ïʲô£¬¸Ð¾õ»¹ÊDz»ÒªÍ¶¹úÄÚÆÚ¿¯ÁË ÒÑÓÐ5È˲ÎÓë
|
|
Éó¸åÒâ¼û£ºCOMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR: Reviewer #1: Using First-principles calculations, the present work studied the *** of ****. Based the calculated ****, a number of *** are predicted. The content is within the scope of the journal. And the result is consistent with the literature and helpful for ***. However, in predicting the ***, the theoretical models naturally ignore the ****, e.g., ****. Thus it is important to compare with experiments to justify the theoretical results and avoid potential misunderstanding of the readers. Also, the language should be polished. I therefore suggest a major revision of the manuscript. Reviewer #2: In this paper, *****£¨ÕªÒªÀïµÄ´óÖÂÄÚÈÝ£©. The author's results of calculation can verify some experimntal resuits of *** and guide ****. Here the reviewer has some questions and advices: 1. According some other reports (such as "****" , ***£¬which is opposite to the results of this paper. Is the result of *** reliable? £¨ÕâÀïÐèҪ˵Ã÷µÄÊÇÎÒÂÛÎÄÀï½áÂÛ¹ØÓÚÕâ·½ÃæµÄ½âÊÍÓëËûÌṩÕâ¸öÂÛÎĵÄÐÅÏ¢ÊÇÒ»Öµģ¬µ«ÊÇËûÕâô˵²»Ò»Ö£¬ÎÒ»¹ÌØÒâ¶ÔÕÕÁËһϣ¬µ±È»Éó¸åÈË¿ÉÄܾÍÊÇËûÌṩÕâÆªÎÄÕµÄ×÷ÕßÖ®Ò»£©2. In the ****. So does the calculation and prediction of *** in this paper have practical significance? 3. There are also some errors in English grammar, tense inconsistency and ununity in single and plural. For example, there are grammatical errors in"it is obviously can be seen" and "with *** has the minimum".Please check the paper again carefully. »ùÓÚÉÏÊö£¬±à¼¸øÁËreject£¬ÎҸоõ×ÜÌå¸Ã¸ø´óÐÞ°¡£¬Ä¿Ç°ÏëÉêËߣ¬²»ÖªµÀ³É¹¦¼¸ÂÊ´ó²»´ó£¬ÒòΪËû˵Õ⼸µãÎҸоõ½âÊÍûÓÐÎÊÌ⣬ÓïÑÔÑÀ¿ÉÒÔÈóÉ«¡£ |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
085600 ²ÄÁÏÓ뻯¹¤ 298
ÒѾÓÐ14È˻ظ´
307Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
085600²ÄÁÏÓ뻯¹¤ 298 µ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸Öпƴó080500×Ü·Ö324Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸ÖÐÄÏ´óѧÀíѧ»¯Ñ§
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
0703»¯Ñ§Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
0703 ¶«»ª´óѧ Àíѧ»¯Ñ§¾ù¹ý a Ïߣ¬×Ü·Ö 281 Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
301Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
295Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
295Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´

|
×£¸£ ·¢×ÔСľ³æIOS¿Í»§¶Ë |
2Â¥2019-04-26 22:57:20
Ñо¿ÉúЦЦ
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 3612.8
- É¢½ð: 1650
- ºì»¨: 3
- Ìû×Ó: 1255
- ÔÚÏß: 52.2Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 4378225
- ×¢²á: 2016-01-24
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ¼¯³ÉµçÂ·ÖÆÔìÓë·â×°
3Â¥2019-04-27 11:48:11
qujia001
½ð³æ (ÕýʽдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 2 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 6169.1
- É¢½ð: 86
- ºì»¨: 14
- Ìû×Ó: 904
- ÔÚÏß: 298.6Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 1704789
- ×¢²á: 2012-03-20
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ¼ÆËã»úÍøÂç
4Â¥2019-04-28 09:44:03
5Â¥2019-04-28 18:48:08
ÁøÐõ³æ
гæ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
- Ó¦Öú: 347 (´óѧÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 1662.9
- ºì»¨: 69
- Ìû×Ó: 3005
- ÔÚÏß: 315.6Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 4465824
- ×¢²á: 2016-03-04
- רҵ: Ö²Îï×ÊԴѧ
6Â¥2019-05-03 10:23:21
Zed-jie
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 4 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 2917.3
- É¢½ð: 1169
- ºì»¨: 21
- Ìû×Ó: 2187
- ÔÚÏß: 272Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 3475453
- ×¢²á: 2014-10-14
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ¹ÌÌåÓë±íÃæÎïÀí»¯Ñ§
7Â¥2019-05-03 10:45:15













, ***£¬which is opposite to the results of this paper. Is the result of *** reliable? £¨ÕâÀïÐèҪ˵Ã÷µÄÊÇÎÒÂÛÎÄÀï½áÂÛ¹ØÓÚÕâ·½ÃæµÄ½âÊÍÓëËûÌṩÕâ¸öÂÛÎĵÄÐÅÏ¢ÊÇÒ»Öµģ¬µ«ÊÇËûÕâô˵²»Ò»Ö£¬ÎÒ»¹ÌØÒâ¶ÔÕÕÁËһϣ¬µ±È»Éó¸åÈË¿ÉÄܾÍÊÇËûÌṩÕâÆªÎÄÕµÄ×÷ÕßÖ®Ò»£©
»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥