| 查看: 697 | 回复: 0 | |||
[交流]
一审回复 ijepes
|
|
电气继电保护方向，今年6月投稿ijepes，9月份收到回复，但是只有一个审稿人，这是什么情况，一下是意见，请xdjm们看一下，第三条意见是啥意思 The proposed method provides an inspiring guide to the practical implementations. Overall, this paper is an interesting and high-quality work. For further clarifying the stated contributions and enhancing the readability of this paper, the following concerns and suggestions need to be carefully addressed, including: 1) The literature review is not that sufficient, resulting in that the motivation of this work is not well stated. 2) The listed main contributions could be more detailed for better describing the proposed protection scheme and clarifying their main contributions; 3) The theoretical proofs are lacking regarding the scalability of the proposed method. More theoretical demonstrations would make the proposed method more convincing. The settings of the used test systems could be presented for convincing the repeatability of this work. More discussions in the case study part could be added for better clarifying the repeatability and scalability of this work; 4) The authors are suggested to go through the entire manuscript to fix grammatical errors, typos, and format issues, e.g., the equation numbers, blurred figures. Especially, the format of the reference should be unified and follow the IJEPES journal template. 发自小木虫IOS客户端 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
有没有人能给点建议
已经有5人回复
-
假如你的研究生提出不合理要求
已经有12人回复
-
实验室接单子
已经有7人回复
-
全日制（定向）博士
已经有5人回复
-
萌生出自己或许不适合搞科研的想法，现在跑or等等看？
已经有4人回复
-
Materials Today Chemistry审稿周期
已经有4人回复
-
参与限项
已经有3人回复
-
对氯苯硼酸纯化
已经有3人回复
-
所感
已经有4人回复
-
要不要辞职读博？
已经有7人回复