| 查看: 3152 | 回复: 13 | |||
| 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 | |||
[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 |
» 猜你喜欢
288求调剂085600材料与化工
已经有8人回复
304求调剂
已经有5人回复
289求调剂
已经有11人回复
0817化学工程与技术312分求调剂
已经有5人回复
267化工调剂求助
已经有6人回复
中科大材料299求调剂
已经有12人回复
274求调剂
已经有14人回复
一志愿哈尔滨工业大学0856材料与化工,前三科206,总分283,求调剂
已经有7人回复
A区一本交叉课题组,低分调剂,招收机械电子信息通信等交叉方向
已经有48人回复
278求调剂
已经有5人回复
» 抢金币啦!回帖就可以得到:
清华-西电集成电路方向招收联培博士(普博)
+2/218
[求助]日本动漫里用手表和三角板测经纬度是怎么回事?
+1/188
西北大学化材院张健健教授课题组招收2026“申请-考核” 制博士研究生1名
+2/162
北京信息科技大学联合清华大学某国家重点实验室,联合培养硕生、博生,并长期招博士后
+1/86
江西科技师范大学微生物天然药物老师介绍
+1/82
广东海洋大学滨海农业学院园艺系梁清志博士课题组接受园艺学和农艺与种业专业考生调剂
+1/82
北京信息科技大学智能机器人技术方向,联合清华培养硕生、博生,并长期招博士后
+1/80
成都大学IMRC团队接收调剂研究生
+1/35
申请取消论坛的归档操作
+1/20
现在科研环境这么差,我想这样试试
+1/19
2026年北京石油化工学院环境学科-水污染控制工程方向课题组欢迎您
+1/19
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/
+1/14
26考研一志愿西南交大,本科双非通信工程,寻求西南地区的08调剂名额.
+1/9
【硕士调剂招生】武汉科技大学招收材料、化工、环境、冶金类2026级硕士生
+1/8
中科院微生物所-肿瘤免疫或微生物组方向的博士后(特别研究助理)
+1/5
复试可能过不了想调剂
+1/4
【!08工科】接受机械、控制、土木、计算机等08工科调剂,秋秋裙:1090939427
+1/4
上海交通大学化学化工学院张智涛课题组诚聘博士后
+1/3
#南方科技大学# 仿生医药与材料实验室 招高分子方向博士生、科研助理
+1/3
北京高校副校长团队招收机械类,环境类学硕和专硕
+1/2
13楼2019-12-29 09:53:38
6楼2019-10-27 17:59:54
10楼2019-10-27 18:34:02
11楼2019-10-27 19:08:04
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
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
2019-10-27 18:33
回复
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
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













),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..)
回复此楼