24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
查看: 706  |  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

sxs2006

银虫 (正式写手)

[交流] 这种情况如何回复IEEE transaction审稿人的意见

投IEEE transaction的一片文章审稿回来了,主要的意见如下:
AE:The idea is very interesting, but all the reviewers agree that the application is too simple.
Review #1:The proposal presented in this paper is quite interesting. The new application is quite interesting and promising though several justifications should be included in order to clarify some decisions made in the paper.
Review #2: The paper has shown a good application. The topic is very interesting and contribute the application with some distinctive features.... The methodology was detailed with also detailed experiments and evaluation. The paper was also well presented and organized. I suggest the paper can be accepted provided that the following comments can be addressed accordingly...
Review #3: The approach in sections 4.2 and 4.3 is nothing new; The case study in section 5 seems rather simple...; what are contributions in section 4.2 and 4.3 There seems nothing.
AE和2个审稿人的意见还都不错,但review 3直接拒了,提了些尖锐的意见,遇到这种情况,大家怎么回复审稿人的意见啊? 帮忙给些建议,录用的机率大吗?
回复此楼
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

sxs2006

银虫 (正式写手)

影响因子比较高,3点多
6楼2010-03-04 19:22:28
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 10 个回答

sxs2006

银虫 (正式写手)

主编给了major revision
2楼2010-03-04 15:00:15
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

理工光学

木虫 (正式写手)

★ ★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包,谢谢回帖交流
lby1258(金币+1):鼓励交流~ 2010-03-04 20:15
第一个专家比较中肯,只要影响因子不高,可以好好修一下,录用的概率比较大。
但是第三个专家:4.1给你评价了吗?4.2和4.3他说已有,你的创新点是不是没表达出来啊?
5楼2010-03-04 19:08:19
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

laf_123

铁虫 (小有名气)


小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包,谢谢回帖交流
把自己的创新点尽量挖出来并且说明白 让审稿人信服!
7楼2010-03-04 20:05:53
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
普通表情 高级回复(可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见