| 查看: 1036 | 回复: 15 | |||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | |||
| 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 | |||
xqbeyond木虫 (著名写手)
斗士
|
[交流]
谋求正解编辑意思！虽知已拒！
|
||
|
Dear Dr. qiang, Thank you for submitting your above-mentioned paper to Acta Materialia. As the Coordinating Editor of Acta Materialia, I receive all submitted papers. It is my responsibility to examine all papers before sending them to different editors for processing. Since in recent times, the number of submissions has increased substantially, I use my judgment in dividing the submitted papers into two categories: to be processed and not to be processed. This is to maintain a reasonable workload for the editors and the reviewers. I am afraid your paper fell into the latter category. My decision for a paper for "not to be processed" is based on several criteria: the quality of writing; the review of relevant literature in the Introduction Section: the length of the article (we do not publish short articles in Acta because we have Scripta Materialia for that purpose); the match with aims and scope of Acta; and the advancement of existing knowledge base. I have decided not to further process your manuscript because: - the relevant published literature is not critically reviewed. - the English grammar and syntax are not satisfactory. Overall, the writing is not optimal and not up to the standards of Acta Materialia. - it is short for an Acta submission and does not contain sufficient new results, techniques or theories relevant to the field your manuscript addresses to warrant publication as a full paper in Acta Materialia. - it does not have a good fit with the aims and scope of Acta Materialia. Thank you for your interest in publishing in Acta Materialia. Yours sincerely, Subhash Mahajan Assigning Editor Acta Materialia |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
国自然面上和省基金B类撒花
已经有16人回复
-
有没有学校收留
已经有3人回复
-
312求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
华师大读博
已经有5人回复
-
又一批高校组建人工智能学院 师资行吗 不是骗人吗
已经有5人回复
-
急需审稿人！！！
已经有3人回复
-
申博/考博
已经有8人回复
-
295分求调剂
已经有6人回复
-
085600材料与化工调剂
已经有6人回复
-
有没有接收比较快的sci期刊呀，最好在一个月之内的，研三孩子求毕业
已经有7人回复
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖交流
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖交流
|
the relevant published literature is not critically reviewed. 你没有在introduction中好好review已经出版的相关文献，没有把他们与你的工作相关联起来。应该好好评论已有的文献，他们的不足，引出你论文的motivation - the English grammar and syntax are not satisfactory. Overall, the writing is not optimal and not up to the standards of Acta Materialia. 写作问题。可以好好模仿该杂志的文风。 - it is short for an Acta submission and does not contain sufficient new results, techniques or theories relevant to the field your manuscript addresses to warrant publication as a full paper in Acta Materialia. 文章短，该杂志需要长文。你可以深入分析讨论。该出版社有配套的短文杂志。 - it does not have a good fit with the aims and scope of Acta Materialia. 论文主题与该杂志的读者群不吻合 |
13楼2009-07-12 20:58:49
2楼2009-07-12 16:28:02
4楼2009-07-12 16:36:21
5楼2009-07-12 16:44:12
5