应《网络安全法》要求，自2017年10月1日起，未进行实名认证将不得使用互联网跟帖服务。为保障您的帐号能够正常使用，请尽快对帐号进行手机号验证，感谢您的理解与支持！

24小时热门版块排行榜    

小木虫论坛-学术科研互动平台 » 学术交流区 » 论文投稿 » 投稿求助 » 如何回复拒稿人创新性不够的意见？
51/1返回列表
查看: 2975  |  回复: 31
只看楼主 @他人 存档 新回复提醒 (忽略) 收藏    在APP中查看
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

搞不懂の晴天

新虫 (小有名气)
已领完
如何回复拒稿人创新性不够的意见？
领取红包 (小木虫手机app专属红包)

扫一扫，下载小木虫客户端

iEEE Access收到意见，两个接收修改，一个拒稿不建议重投，意见是Reviewer: 3

Recommendation: Reject (do not encourage resubmit)

Comments:
I cannot recommend the acceptance of this work for the following reasons:
1. Limited novelty. The use of low rank prior and iterative method for image inpainting has been widely studied in the literature since 2010. It is difficult to tell what is the fundamentally new insight brought by this paper especially in view of recent publications (e.g., refs. [28] and [30]). The paper contains several mathematical claims&proofs, but I have found they do not contain sufficiently new results. Meantime, I think there is a gap between the developed mathematical theory and the application into real-world images (e.g., the approximation of non-convexity).
2. Unconvincing experimental results. The reported experimental results do not demonstrate better performance than previous state-of-the-art such as TSLRA [28]. The authors have only considered low-rank based inpainting methods and totally overlooked recently developed deep learning-based image inpainting. Therefore it is difficult to evaluate how this work is compared with the current state-of-the-art.
3. Poor literary presentation. The paper is not well-written and contains many grammatical errors. It is suggested that this paper be proofread by someone whose native language is English before the resubmission.

Additional Questions:
Does the paper contribute to the body of knowledge?: Very little in my opinion.

Is the paper technically sound?: Yes.

Is the subject matter presented in a comprehensive manner?: Not always.

Are the references provided applicable and sufficient?: No. Recent works on deep learning based image inpainting are missing.
请问，这该如何是好？怎么回复这样尖锐的问题呢？再投的机会大不大？

发自小木虫IOS客户端
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢
1楼 2019-12-29 10:46:50
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

搞不懂の晴天

新虫 (小有名气)
送红花一朵
引用回帖:
22楼: Originally posted by 珊瑚海super at 2019-12-29 11:03:33
只能逐条逐句回复，总体态度是感谢他的评论，不说和他对立的词汇，用极其温和的句子，当然你不能说同意他的观点，因为他说你没创新，例如他举了个文献说和你的类似，那就针对这个文献找出不同点，如果可以，最好是能 ...

谢谢谢谢，非常感谢您的回复。

发自小木虫IOS客户端
赞一下 回复此楼
24楼2019-12-29 11:06:47
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 32 个回答
简单回复
tzynew2楼
2019-12-29 10:47   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
zhaoqian89337楼
2019-12-29 10:47   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
xialei09183楼
2019-12-29 10:47   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
xialei09184楼
2019-12-29 10:47   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
17西伯利亚狼11楼
2019-12-29 10:48   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
依然雪14楼
2019-12-29 10:48   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
陶瓷玻璃水泥13楼
2019-12-29 10:48   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
CCTower9楼
2019-12-29 10:47   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
luckygao8楼
2019-12-29 10:47   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
一只小硕6楼
2019-12-29 10:47   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
务本道生10楼
2019-12-29 10:48   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
好一个颖果12楼
2019-12-29 10:48   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫Android客户端
Zly1245楼
2019-12-29 10:47   回复  
搞不懂の晴天(金币+1): 谢谢参与
已获得1个金币 发自小木虫IOS客户端
查看全部 32 个回答
普通表情 龙 兔 虎 猫 高级回复 (可上传附件)
信息提示
关闭
请填处理意见
关闭