24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

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

feitian1984

银虫 (正式写手)

应助: 4 (幼儿园)
金币: 326.8
散金: 444
帖子: 816
在线: 42.6小时
虫号: 940460
注册: 2010-01-11
性别: GG
专业: 海洋地质学

[交流] 大家帮我看看我这篇文章中的几率有多大

大家好，有没有那位投过亚洲地学杂志（Journal of Asian Earth Sciences)？我投了一篇，审了快一年才审回。终于审回来了，审稿意见是：

The reviewers have commented on your above paper. They indicated that it is not acceptable for publication in its present form.
However, if you feel that you can suitably address the reviewers' comments (included below), I invite you to revise and resubmit your manuscript.
Please carefully address the issues raised in the comments.
If you are submitting a revised manuscript, please also:
a) outline each change made (point by point) as raised in the reviewer comments
AND/OR
b) provide a suitable rebuttal to each reviewer comment not addressed
To submit your revision, please do the following:******

Reviewers' comments:
This paper deals with *******. The two reviewers agreed that this paper merits publication at the Journal of Asian Earth Sciences. Nevertheless, vital revisions are necessary to improve the manuscript for a publishable condition. These comments would surely be very useful to the authors to extensively improve their manuscript.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript by ***makes an important contribution to better understand the ******, by using the technique of ******.
The ******have been found in fine-grained mudstone, shale or chalk only in Cretaceous and Cenozoic basins. The system was first recognized in Upper Miocene in the deep water zone in South China Sea with high quality 3D seismic data using seismic attributes.
DETAILED COMMENTS
******

Reviewer #3: The manuscript titled "******" by ****** documents the findings of a 3D seismic cube which shows ******within some particular horizons, which they argue may serve as the pathway linking the source rocks and reservoir. Overall the dataset is interesting and worth publishing. However, there are some major concerns:
1. ******2. ******3. *****
4. ******
There are some minor comments:
******
In sum, the manuscript needs modification before it is ready for publication. Using the geometric information of the******imaged by this study, the authors have made interesting observations and proposal important interpretation. On the other hand, it will be good to use additional information to better support the discussion about the formation and implications of the ******. The authors have good command of English, but there are still many loose-ends in the manuscript that they can work on during the revision. The seismic data look great, and it will be great to make this manuscript more process-oriented so similar work can be applied in other regions.
以上是两个审稿人的审稿意见。
各位过来的高人，指点一下，这篇文章的中的几率高吗？这个杂志太慢了，我怕修改后又要好长的时间，要是被拒了，就太悲剧了。请路过，知道的一定不惜赐教啊，先谢谢各位虫虫了。

[ Last edited by feitian1984 on 2010-1-18 at 17:36 ]

回复此楼