| 查看: 872 | 回复: 9 | ||
| 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 | ||
[交流]
论文被拒的原因
|
||
|
唉，论文又被拒了，总结一点就是一定要尽可能提高论文的质量。 对这篇论文本来就没有底，自己又没有改进的思路，就投出去请审稿人指点指点。 Dear ##, The above manuscript has been reviewed by our referee(s). On the basis of the resulting report(s), it is our judgment that the paper is unsuitable for publication in ***. We enclose comments from the criticism that led to our decision. Yours sincerely, Samindranath Mitra Associate Editor ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Report of Referee A ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ###I cannot recommend publication of this paper in its present form. The quality of the data and its analysis is comparatively poor, and not enough information is provided to consider alternative explanations. In more detail: *** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Report of Referee B -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The authors report on the experimental investigation of***. They start with a general introduction on numerous inconsistencies in our current understanding on such effects. With their paper they add another "strange" phenomenon to this confusion but, in my point of view, they do not really contribute significantly to the general problem. In this respect, I would say that this paper is absolutely not appropriate for ***. Additionally, as to the specific experiment I would have several important questions which should be addressed before any publication, most probably in a more specialized journal. At this moment the authors present experiments on one sample with a quite limited choice of parameters, that are mostly not even specified. Moreover, In view of a lack of convincingly presented experimental facts, I find it difficult to judge the theoretical interpretation on its merit alone and would not really feel able to comment on this in more detail. Generally, I got the impression that, also from the theoretical point of view, the authors' approach adds much more confusion than it resolves. Here I will limit myself on some important experimental issues which might be helpful for the authors. 1) No parameters of the sample are given. In particular, ***. As an experimentalist, I would expect, at the very least, that such parameters are determined and that their importance for any interpretation is investigated and clearly stated. ***** [ Last edited by magnetite on 2009-12-4 at 16:34 ] |
回复此楼
stevenaaa
金虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 858.6
- 散金: 10
- 帖子: 771
- 在线: 131.1小时
- 虫号: 321563
- 注册: 2007-03-11
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 周围血管疾病
6楼2009-12-04 19:30:09
yinhuanshun
至尊木虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 110 (高中生)
- 金币: 14693.7
- 散金: 3688
- 红花: 11
- 帖子: 5171
- 在线: 378.6小时
- 虫号: 200018
- 注册: 2006-02-27
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 生化分析及生物传感
2楼2009-12-04 17:45:35
lmm5373
木虫 (职业作家)
- 应助: 18 (小学生)
- 金币: 3655.5
- 散金: 2814
- 红花: 5
- 帖子: 3818
- 在线: 1537.3小时
- 虫号: 740052
- 注册: 2009-04-04
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 偏微分方程
3楼2009-12-04 17:46:50
yam_yang
金虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 1 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 1096.2
- 散金: 3066
- 帖子: 1313
- 在线: 116.4小时
- 虫号: 834743
- 注册: 2009-08-26
- 专业: 信息安全
4楼2009-12-04 18:21:44
5