| 查看: 3151 | 回复: 13 | |||
[交流]
IEEE ACCESS 审稿意见大家帮忙分析分析
|
|||
大家好~第一次投稿，编辑给的意见是建议修改后重投，两个接收，还有一个拒绝（意见很尖锐 ），大家可以帮忙分析下要不要换reviewers（第二个审稿人有点一股脑否定的意思..）下面是三位审稿人的意见： Reviewer: 1 Recommendation: Accept (minor edits) Comments: What additional benefits would this research bring to the readers of this journal? What different this research from the previously published papers on the topic? Additional Questions: Does the paper contribute to the body of knowledge?: Yes. Because Code comments contain valuable information to support software development, especially during code reading and code maintenance. It is very important to classifying code comments for provide better data for program understanding. But please explain what additional benefits would this research bring to the readers of this journal? What different this research from the previously published papers on the topic? Is the paper technically sound?: Yes. Very technically... Is the subject matter presented in a comprehensive manner?: Yes Are the references provided applicable and sufficient?: Most of reference from proceeding/conference. Maybe can include from journal of index. The reader suggests that the authors could collect more publications to enhance all these code comments. Reviewer: 2 Recommendation: Reject (do not encourage resubmit) Comments: It is a novel apporach for understanding the comments from program, however, from the paper, I did not find the most impacted contributions to techniques. While authors of this paper did not clearly defined how this code-comments to texts or sentence classifications. That's what we expect to see how AI or methods understanding and assessments. Additional Questions: Does the paper contribute to the body of knowledge?: Somehow or No Is the paper technically sound?: Somehow or No Is the subject matter presented in a comprehensive manner?: Maybe Are the references provided applicable and sufficient?: Yes Reviewer: 3 Recommendation: Accept (minor edits) Comments: It is a well-presented paper on an important topic about automatic code-comment assesment. Additional Questions: Does the paper contribute to the body of knowledge?: Yes, paper has a contribution to the body of knowledge, it presents a framework for assessment of code comments using Multi Layer Perceptrons. Beside, it also provides a manually annotated dataset for automatic code-comment assessment approaches. Thus, it deserves to ve published. Is the paper technically sound?: The paper is well-wrtiten and well-presented. The methodology and experimentation section gives the appropriate technical details about the methodolodgy proposed. Is the subject matter presented in a comprehensive manner?: The depth of the detail in both data preperation and Dcomment framework they proposed were satisfactory. Besides, it also includes comprehensible literature review on topic. Are the references provided applicable and sufficient?: All major works has been cited. The level of references provided in the paper is satisfactory. 又看了一遍第二个审稿人的意见，我好气哦，感觉不像自己这个领域的...不知道怎么说服他  |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
材料与化工328求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
286求调剂
已经有8人回复
-
290分材料工程085601求调剂 数二英一
已经有10人回复
-
308求调剂
已经有7人回复
-
266材料化工求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
085600材料与化工 298 调剂
已经有10人回复
-
军事科学院防化研究院接受26届调剂生
已经有4人回复
-
材料277分求调剂
已经有14人回复
-
材料学硕318求调剂
已经有24人回复
-
复试调剂
已经有10人回复
» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:
-
中国农业科学院环发所博士后招聘
+2/420
-
核用高温高压水环境及极端材料服役评价实验设备
+1/100
-
2026研究生招生
+1/52
-
澳大利亚皇家墨尔本理工大学（RMIT）理学院 院士团队2026招收CSC博士生
+1/50
-
中煤科工生态环境科技有限公司招聘植物学相关科研人员1人
+2/32
-
【实战型】【生物医药】2026青岛大学招博士生 含少数民族骨干计划2名！！！
+1/17
-
国家纳米科学中心招收联合培养博士及博士后
+1/17
-
徐工-环境工程学院-招收调剂硕士
+1/16
-
26届计算机、电子信息类、电科、控制、通信考研T j信息pp骏：74+08+76+6+20
+1/11
-
中科院深圳先进技术研究院-宁波诺丁汉大学2026年联合培养博士研究生招生
+1/9
-
温州大学李新华教授课题组2026年招收硕士研究生信息
+1/7
-
中国科学院国家级人才团队博士后招聘启示
+1/6
-
北京高校副校长团队招收机械类，环境类学硕和专硕
+1/6
-
香港科技大学 招生 2026 Fall全奖博士 -- 机械/电子/材料
+1/5
-
安徽农业大学许云辉教授课题组招收材料类、化工类、医学类等工科专硕学硕考研调剂
+1/5
-
浙江大学基础医学院杨林课题组诚聘合成药物化学方向科研助理
+1/5
-
26届计算机、电子信息类、电科、控制、通信考研T j信息pp骏：74+08+76+6+20？
+1/4
-
南京工业大学-陆小华教授课题组招收博士研究生-分子与界面化学工程
+1/4
-
调剂
+1/2
-
深圳大学何传新课题组诚聘博士后、（副）研究员
+1/1
6楼2019-10-27 17:59:54
10楼2019-10-27 18:34:02
11楼2019-10-27 19:08:04
★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
|
我有一个审稿人直接拒稿不接受重投 只说了一句文章缺乏创新 其他三个审稿人接受小的修改 编辑给的拒稿重投 我回应了每一个审稿人 包括拒稿不鼓励重投的 在cover letter中写明是否可以更换拒稿的审稿人 其实编辑在邮件中也说了 可以考虑是否更换审稿人 发自小木虫IOS客户端 |
12楼2019-10-28 07:26:43
13楼2019-12-29 09:53:38
14楼2020-01-28 14:55:38
简单回复
一品哥哥2楼
2019-10-27 17:32
回复
wdz18(金币+1): 谢谢参与
， 发自小木虫Android客户端
爱星3楼
2019-10-27 17:39
回复
wdz18(金币+1): 谢谢参与
。 发自小木虫Android客户端
超级老快4楼
2019-10-27 17:39
回复
wdz18(金币+1): 谢谢参与
q 发自小木虫IOS客户端
nono20095楼
2019-10-27 17:39
回复
wdz18(金币+1): 谢谢参与
·
tzynew7楼
2019-10-27 18:00
回复
wdz18(金币+1): 谢谢参与
LWJL20198楼
2019-10-27 18:11
回复
wdz18(金币+1): 谢谢参与
。 发自小木虫Android客户端
2019-10-27 18:33
回复
