24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

【奖励】本帖被评价19次，作者anfen2366增加金币 15.2 个

anfen2366

禁虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 431.6
帖子: 33
在线: 17.8小时
虫号: 14454312

[资源] 关于SCI论文投稿的一些素材和教训

1. Cover letter
Cover letter是给编辑的简短信件，简要描述所投文章的主要内容，下面是我投《Scripta Materialia》时准备的Cover letter。其实要说简短概括文章内容，摘要再合适不过了（下面模板中斜体字即为文章的摘要）：

Paris,September 6, 2018
Mechanics Unit
Materials and Structures Group
ENSTA-Paristech
Chemin de la Hunière
91761 Palaiseau cdex
Editorial committee
Scriptamaterialia
Dear editor,

Please find attached our paper entitled « Degradation of the recoverable strain during stress controlled full transformation cycling in NiTi shape memory alloys» to be considered for publication in your esteemed journal. Our paperinvestigates the degradation of the recoverable strain during full transformation cycling in shape memory alloys. Results show that such degradation occurs due to: (i) untransformed austenite during full transformation, (ii) residual martensite after complete unloading, and (iii) plastic strain produced in the latest reverse transformation. Particularly, the plastic strain tends to zero when the stabilized state is reached. Furthermore, the degradation is frequency-dependent in the sense that a higher loading frequency results in a larger degradation of the recoverable strain. Finally, it is shown that fatigue lifetime decreases when transformation degradation increases.

Sincerely yours
ZHANG Yahui

2. 推荐审稿人

很多期刊投稿时都要推荐审稿人，3到5人不等。我推荐审稿人的时候，主要考虑两条：一是避开和自己团队有过合作的熟人，二是找一些领域内小方向相关的专家，而且推荐的审稿人不少就是本文参考文献里的作者。推荐理由写的很简短，例如：

Prof. XXX is a recognized specialist in this field, and his work is
cited in this work to explain the plastic deformation in SMAs.

3. 返修

论文若有返修的机会，就离接受近了一大步，当然也不尽然。这里给出一些我投稿过程中成功和失败的案例。

3.1 返修Cover letter

返修的Cover letter一般直接写上编辑的名字，文本如下：

Dear Professor Kazuhiro Hono,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to revise our paper entitled «Degradation of the recoverable strain during stress controlled full transformation cycling in NiTi shape memory alloys» (SMM-18-1696). In the revised version, all the reviewer’s comments and suggestions have been taken into account (the modifications are highlighted in blue in the paper) and the details are given in the attached document “Answer to the reviewer”.

Thank you very much and looking forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,
Sincerely yours
ZHANG Yahui

3.2 小修接受

截止目前我遇到的最好的审稿意见没有提具体的修改意见，当天回复，第二天接受。

Reviewer's comment: This paper presents an interesting work showing the effect of untransformed austenite and residual martensite on the super-elastic behaviorof a NiTi wire subjected to a cycling tension loading with two frequencies values. It shows that an induced remnant strain is reached for stabilized behavior leading to a decreasing of the maximum transformation strain between the initial and stabilized cycles. The effect of loading frequency is carried out by considering various values of frequency between 0.1 and 1 Hz. It appears that remnant strain increases with frequency increasing.

The paper is very well written and presents an original work. It will be interesting to confirm such conclusions by considering the effects of geometry (higher and lower diameter and plate samples in order to consider the localization influence), material properties (effect of microstructure on plastic strain and internal stresses) and loading (lower stress level leadingto internal loop behavior and stress rate effect).

返修时给审稿人解释了一下他提的几个效应，然后在引言（Introduction）和最后的展望（Prospect）里简短描述了一下。提交返修稿第二天接受。

有的时候小修还会遇到一些奇怪的问题，那我也就俏皮地回答一下：

Reviewer's comments: In Fig. 8, why does not it contain the results at room temperature? Is there a specific consideration? If yes, what?
(图18用温度箱测了不同温度下材料的力学性能，审稿人问：为啥木有室温的？有特殊考虑吗？)

Answer: There is no specific consideration; it is just because the first author used the temperature chamber and then unconsciously heated the specimens to high temperatures.
(没有特殊考虑，仅仅因为第一作者（也就是我）使用了温度箱后情不自禁地就把温度升高了。)

3.3 大修接受

我投稿遇到最多的就是大修了。下面这个审稿意见是我投《International Journal of Plasticity》遇到的具有代表性的大修意见，

Reveiewer' comments: In this paper, the authors investigate how the generation and absorption of latent heat aects the low cycle fatigue of shape memory alloys (SMAs) under different cyclic loading frequencies. The content of the article shows a work that has been conducted carefully, the procedures are well explained, and a plethora of experimental results are illustrated, discussed, and modeled. To my opinion,however, it is not very clear how this work is in a mechanics based journal of the caliber of IJP.
I believe that the specic section needs to be completely reconstructed, aligned with experimental evidence as provided in the literature, and discussed with respect to the model suggested or removed altogether.
（……这篇文章看起来做得很仔细，步骤描写的很清楚，实验结果也讨论了，但是，我认为这篇文章还差得远，要重写……）

Answers: The authors are thankful to the reviewer for his constructive comments. Our study consists of experimental and theoretical parts, which is compatible with the scope of IJP as it is stated in the scope of the journal: “The purpose of the journal is to report original research on all aspects of plastic deformation, damage and fracture …...Significant experimental, numerical or theoretical contributions advancing the understanding of plastic behaviour of solids are of special interest, together with studies relating macroscopic to the microscopic behaviour of solids.” Actually many articles dealing with the fatigue behaviour including crack growth and fatigue models have been published in IJP, such as......
针对审稿人其他的技术性问题，做了回答和解释，把审稿人认为篇幅太长的理论推导，放在了文章最后的附录里。返修后经过两个月二审，直接接受。

3.4 大修被拒

大修被拒的经历太多了，归纳下来有两点，一是文章水平确实不到位，二是遇到一个和作者意见向左的审稿人。下面分别给出素材：

文章水平不到位被拒的经历还是来自《International Journal of Plasticity》，三个审稿人都给出了大修的意见，代表性的如下：

Reviewer‘s comments: The paper has not enough innovation as an independent paper comparing to the previous work. More's important, this paper attempts to give a physical insight into the energy analysis at both micro and macro scales, however, some necessary experiments at micro scale are absent. The predicted fatigue lives by the energy-based model should be provided here if any new contributions are added into the model.
（这篇文章和作者前期工作相比，创新性不足，更重要的是，作者试图从宏观微观尺度给出物理解释，然而相关微观实验缺失……）

我花了两周时间苦口婆心说了一大堆，旁征博引洋洋洒洒，但就是没有补做实验，因为我们那里微观实验实在做不了。

结果被拒，审稿人的意见是：

The paper cannot provide more new contributions than the previous work, the reviewer insists original judgment: the present version is not suitable for a publication in IJP.

遇到和作者意见向左的审稿人的经历来自《Journal of the Mechanics and Pysics of Solids》。任凭我如何解释，审稿人坚持认为我的观点不对：

The key concerns on this manuscript is that the basic concepts, starting points and the fundamental physics mechanism are not clearly stated/provided and even wrong.Also the authors failed to clearly address the other major concerns raised by the reviewer. Therefore I will not recommend it for publication in JMPS.
However, I feel that this manuscript is quite suitable for publication in certain more specific journal like Int. J. of Fatigue.
（这篇文章好多地方不明确甚至是错误的……）

因为这条审稿意见，文章被拒掉了。让人哭笑不得的是，其他审稿人二审时还专门赞赏了我对这个审稿人的回复：

I also appreciate how the authors dealt with the comments of the referee 1.....
I appreciate all the efforts the authors made in the rebuttal and agree with the publication of the article in its present form.
（另外，我还很赞赏作者对审稿人1的回复……我推荐发表……）

被拒后给编辑发了封邮件，向这个审稿人讨说法：说别人做的工作是错误的不能空口白牙说，请拿出你的理论和实验依据。后来编辑回信，审稿人没回音，他也没办法。

3.5 忍无可忍、怼回去

最近接受的一篇《International Journal of Plasticity》，在所有审稿人全部接受的情况下，有一审稿人，连拒四次。这是审稿人第三拒，实在没法改，那就不改了，怼回去

Reviewer's Comments:My final decision is such that it is not demonstrated experimentally and theoretically that the term "TRIP" can be used in the phenomena. It seems that the reasonable connection between experimental result, theory, and modelling is missing in this paper.
Additionally, it may be difficult to claim theoretical advances in present study, because the equations 1-20 are just the definitions of physical quantities in the first and second laws of thermodynamics.
(作者所谓的“TRIP”无法解释他们的实验现象，而且他们的实验结果和理论建模没有必然联系——这个指的是我的疲劳准则只是经验公式而不是直接理论推导结果。)

Answers: The reviewer expresses his concern about the use of the term "TRIP" for the phenomenon, however, we feel that TRIP is the right term for the phenomena described in the paper......In fact, in the pseudoelastic domain of SMAs, the applied stress is lower than the plastic yield limit; TRIP is then the unique mechanism that could explain the triggering of plastic deformation during stress-induced transformation. This has been reported in many works, such as:......... When it comes to the reviewer’s doubts about the connection between our theoretical modeling and experimental results, we must point out that none of the classical stressor strain based criteria derive from quantitative derivations; they are alwaysempirical equations from experimental results (Masson-Coffin criterion,Crossland Criterion, Findley criterion, etc.).To the best knowledge of the authors, the only criterion that considers mesoscopic stress is the Dang Vancriterion, and even in his case, the validation of the model is carried out at amacroscopic scale using a meso-macro passage.
"TRIP"这个概念大家都用了多少年了。。。传统的疲劳准则都是经验公式，都不是理论直接推出来的。。。

Reviewer's comments: Additionally, it may be difficult to claim theoretical advances in present study, because the equations 1-20 are just the definitions of physical quantities in the first and second laws of thermodynamics.
(公式1-20没有创新性，都是基本的热力学第一定律和第二定律公式。)

Answers: Of course they are derived from the first and second laws of thermodynamics； they are the foundation of continuum mechanics. (这是当然了，热力学第一第二定律是所有连续介质力学的基础。)

投稿后，收到审稿意见，仍然拒，列了三点拒稿理由。然而，主编接受了。

4. 催稿

审稿人拖是常事，然而拖得太久就没辙了，该催还得催。

4.1 客气地催

Dear editor,

I'm not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status of my submitted manuscript: (ID: CMAT-D-18-00038) Entitled "Energy-based analysis of temperature oscillation at the shakedown state in shape memory alloys"
It has been submitted for over three months, but I have not heard of any decision from the journal. I will be most grateful if you could let me know the current status of the manuscript.
Thank very much for your consideration, and look forward to hearing from you soon.

With kind regards,
Yours sincerely,
ZHANG Yahui
尊敬的主编大人，

很抱歉冒昧地打扰您，我的文章投了三个多月了一点消息也木有，您给瞅瞅啊。。。

您真诚的
张亚辉

4.2 不客气地催

Dear editor,

I am writing to inquire about our paper reference above. This paper has been submitted more than 8 months since Feb 15, but the status of the paper is still "under review".
I understand that reviewers can sometimes be busy but there is limit. It is not normal to keep a paper 8 moths for review. I have never faced such a situation.
If your journal is unable to make a decision of our submission, please let me know and let me withdraw the paper to submit it to another journal. I would be very grateful for your attention and thank you very much for your consideration.
Sincerely yours,
ZHANG Yahui, PhD

编辑你好，我从未见过如此拖沓的审稿，八个月啊，算了，我撤稿了。

结果：两周后终于收到了审稿意见。

5. 结语
上述仅供参考，不可推而广之，附件是关于投稿全过程的资料，有兴趣的可以看看，若能对有需要的人有一点点帮助，实属荣幸。最后祝各位科研狗投稿顺利！

回复此楼