求各位大佬帮忙看一下大修意见 - 论文投稿 - 投稿求助

版块导航: 正在加载中...

客户端APP下载

论文辅导

申博辅导

登录注册

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

返回列表

lijahliou

新虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 173.7
帖子: 47
在线: 10.5小时
虫号: 27406499

已领完

求各位大佬帮忙看一下大修意见: 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

第一次投稿，希望大家可以帮忙看一下编辑与审稿人的要求，因为审稿人要求比对的算法与我所做的其实并不是太相关。
编辑意见：

I have received the reviewer's comments on your paper that are appended below. The reviewer has advised that your manuscript requires a revision before it can be reconsidered for publication. Agreeing to reviewer’s comments, I also believe it is crucial to reference the existing works and ideally compare with any of these works. Various localization approaches includes particle-filter methods, methods based on grid refinement/iterative pruning/maximum likelihood. Here are additional recent works that will help you revise your manuscript:
一堆文献

审稿人意见：

However, this paper lacks in two ways (a) references to existing works, in particular, some particle filter methods, and (b) somewhat inadequate quality of presentation. Both aspects can be addressed in the revised version.  The following are some references on various other approaches to the localization problem studied in this paper.
The references [2,4] utilize particle filter method  for localization - authors should compare their method with those.  Other references provide other methods, in addition to Bayesian and particle filter, to the problem of detection and localization of small radiation sources. This paper will be more complete if references to these works are included.

I included some editorial suggestions in the enclosed, marked manuscript.

Also, reference [8] provides physical measurements for various scenarios - authors may test their method in these datasets.  This might be for future work, and is not needed for this paper.

发自小木虫IOS客户端

回复此楼