| 查看: 7782 | 回复: 46 | ||||
| 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 | ||||
visitor958至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
IEEE杂志与会议专家
|
[交流]
在香港召开的IEEM2009 - 会议审稿意见的交流与讨论。
|
|||
|
据悉 IEEM2009 的接收信今天都已经提前发出，也有不少朋友应该收到了据信。虽然会有审稿意见有些主观，甚至也许带有偏见，但综合来说，应该有比较公正的评论和意见（相对会议来说应该算详细的）。 真金不怕火炼，IEEM一直都有严格的审稿程序。大家交流一下，把评审意见发一发，互相帮助和学习。 让小木虫学术会议版起到更好的学术交流作用！大家写文章也可以避免类似问题，还有，也学习一下怎么写审稿意见。。。 给个文章号和文章题目（不要作者姓名或单位），我确认之后，按信息量奖励1-20个金币！（会特别多给文章被拒的。） www.ieem2009.org [ Last edited by visitor958 on 2009-11-9 at 20:43 ] |
回复此楼» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐
 杂谈 |
» 猜你喜欢
澳大利亚 Murdoch University 全奖博士招生（3个名额）地质化工冶金领域
已经有62人回复
-
我的国基提前知道中了，可是同事的操作让我实在接受不了，怎么会有这样的人
已经有15人回复
-
欢迎发来filecode的Mz6后的代码验证其规律
已经有29人回复
-
关于Filecode分析方法
已经有12人回复
-
咱们一起用铁证分析2026国家社科基金中标与否
已经有11人回复
-
小木虫上这么多卖论文的，真有人买论文么？感觉没必要啊
已经有10人回复
-
阿姨
已经有4人回复
-
一作与独作在应聘高校教师时区别大吗
已经有4人回复
-
静等基金结果
已经有21人回复
-
FileCode能看出啥？
已经有28人回复
请教检索时间
★ ★ ★ ★ ★
visitor958(金币+5,VIP+0):谢谢分享。检索时间没有人可以完全保证，但会议和前两届举办得都差不多，会议历史应该是个好的参考了。 7-21 19:06
visitor958(金币+5,VIP+0):谢谢分享。检索时间没有人可以完全保证，但会议和前两届举办得都差不多，会议历史应该是个好的参考了。 7-21 19:06
|
你好！这个会议正是被检索需要多长时间？由于急着毕业，迫切想知道！ IEEM09-P-0704 意见：Reviewer 1 Grade A - This paper is excellent and it should be accepted as it is. Comment Using a case study, improved Solow model was carried out for evaluating the contribution of water saving agriculture to economic growth. Reviewer 2 Grade C - This paper can be accepted for this conference after minor revision. A couple of comments for improvement are given below: Comment 1. This paper applies the Solow model to social benefit assessment of water saving agriculture. But it lacks a clear definition for “social benefit”. The following statement is not convincing: “E is the social benefit of water saving agriculture; E1 is the social benefit resulted from technological progress of water saving agriculture; E2 is the social benefit resulted from capital input of water saving agriculture.” 2. Improvement in language is expected. Examples: “All of these techniques have been deep influencing on economy, society and eco-environment.” “There were a number of researches on …”. 3. The paper is not well formatted. You have to exactly follow the IEEE format. |
8楼2009-07-21 16:06:37
etblade
木虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 1 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 4147.9
- 散金: 980
- 帖子: 646
- 在线: 282.9小时
- 虫号: 76536
- 注册: 2005-06-24
- 专业: 农林经济管理
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
visitor958(金币+10,VIP+0):不长，但意见不算少。虽然我没法确认（没有文章号），但奖励首发。 7-20 20:07
努力着(金币+1,VIP+0):感谢参与！ 7-20 23:06
visitor958(金币+10,VIP+0):不长，但意见不算少。虽然我没法确认（没有文章号），但奖励首发。 7-20 20:07
努力着(金币+1,VIP+0):感谢参与！ 7-20 23:06
|
呵呵。我首先发。虽然是接收。但是评审者提出了不少意见。 IEEM09-P-0XXX Research on the Relationship between XX of AA and YY We are pleased to inform you that this paper of yours has been accepted for presentation at IEEM 2009 in Hong Kong. Please incorporate the comments from reviewers in the final version of your paper. Your final paper has to be camera-ready and prepared following the IEEM2009 paper guidelines. Please also ensure that your paper is free from serious language mistakes. To maintain the international standard of IEEE conferences, we reserve the right to exclude your paper in the final proceedings if the language is deemed unsatisfactory. Note also that the abstract length accompanying your final paper may not exceed 150 words which is the standard requirement for inclusion in the Book of Program and Abstracts which will be distributed onsite to all participants. You may select your preferred presentation mode (oral/poster) when uploading the paper (there will be no differentiation in the proceedings, only for conference program). We may face schedule and venue constraints when preparing the program, so do be flexible. However, if for funding or other reasons, you need to give oral presentation, make sure that you select it. Reviewer 1 Grade C - This paper can be accepted for this conference after minor revision. A couple of comments for improvement are given below: Comment Title should be "... an empirical study in China" Many typos and other language mistake. Reviewer 3 Grade C - This paper can be accepted for this conference after minor revision. A couple of comments for improvement are given below: Comment 1. This paper discussed the relationship between XX and YY. Author proposed six XX factors and further using them to proposing six hypotheses. 2. Please explain the difference of "CC" and "DD" mentioned in Introduction section. 3. Citations and references in this paper must to be unified and standardized in a format. 4. Some typing errors, for example "(I)" in Subsetion 3.1, should be revised. [ Last edited by etblade on 2009-7-20 at 20:35 ] |
2楼2009-07-20 20:02:07
mis97
至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 7 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 14912.4
- 红花: 35
- 帖子: 10992
- 在线: 604.7小时
- 虫号: 437535
- 注册: 2007-08-26
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 知识管理
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
visitor958(金币+5,VIP+0):谢谢分享，不过不要报喜不报忧嘛。 7-20 21:14
努力着(金币+1,VIP+0):感谢参与！ 7-20 23:06
visitor958(金币+5,VIP+0):谢谢分享，不过不要报喜不报忧嘛。 7-20 21:14
努力着(金币+1,VIP+0):感谢参与！ 7-20 23:06
|
IEEM09-P-0410 We are pleased to inform you that this paper of yours has been accepted for presentation at IEEM 2009 in Hong Kong. Note that this is the first batch of confirmed acceptance. Decisions on other papers are still pending and will be made before the deadline. Reviewer 1 Grade D - This paper needs a major revision before acceptance. In particular, the authors should consider the following comments: Comment The authors themselves mention that: "Computational tests demonstrate that high-quality solutions are obtained while expending modest computational effort. Due to the limit of this paper, data generation and procedure of computational tests are omitted." However, one should have some way to judge how good their solution methodology is. Preferably it should be supported by some complexity results of their proposed algorithm. If that is too difficult, one may think of including some experimental results to demonstrate the performance metrics of the algorithm. In the absence of any such result, it is impossible to assess the algorithm. So the authors should include either/both of the above in order to make the paper acceptable. Space is not a constraint here. Reviewer 2 Grade C - This paper can be accepted for this conference after minor revision. A couple of comments for improvement are given below: Comment 1. For reverse logistics issue, there are many papers have debated for it, could authors prove their model that using the real data to show the better results. 2. Do authors have different ideas for critical factors in the reverse logistics through figure 1 and integrate it to fit the content of their paper. Reviewer 3 Grade B - This is a suitable paper for this conference. Minor improvement can be done in terms of organization/language/review etc. The authors are advised to check the paper thoroughly and improve it a bit. Comment The problem dealt with in this paper is interesting. The methodology is well explained and justified. Quite a bit of details in the paper as well. However, the paper could be greatly enhanced if a numerical example is provided. Since the authors have stated that some computational tests are done, something could be shown to illustrate that. As this paper is just over 3 pages, there is space for it. Although the language is understandable, the authors should go through the paper carefully in submitting final version. Overall, it is a good piece of work and should be accepted for presentation. |
3楼2009-07-20 21:04:12
mis97
至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 7 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 14912.4
- 红花: 35
- 帖子: 10992
- 在线: 604.7小时
- 虫号: 437535
- 注册: 2007-08-26
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 知识管理
★ ★ ★ ★ ★
visitor958(金币+5,VIP+0):发些上来让大家学习吧（也是我这个贴的目的）。金币加倍，也希望意见有用。 7-20 21:17
visitor958(金币+5,VIP+0):发些上来让大家学习吧（也是我这个贴的目的）。金币加倍，也希望意见有用。 7-20 21:17
|
IEEM09-P-0409 All submissions were reviewed for contents and technical merits by the international panel of reviewers. The conference received a large number of submissions, and we have to be very selective due to schedule and space constraints. Regrettably, it has been decided that your paper is not accepted for IEEM2009. We hope that the comments from the reviewers could be useful for you to improve the paper for a future conference. 这片被批得惨不忍睹亚 |
4楼2009-07-20 21:05:12
