| 查看: 1320 | 回复: 14 | |||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | |||
danshuixmc新虫 (小有名气)
|
[交流]
审稿意见分析 已有14人参与
|
||
|
Reviewer #2: The present paper reports some interesting results, but the style of writing is not satisfactory. Throughout the manuscript, the authors used to explain the experimental results, which are vivid to the readers who are experts in the field. Instead, the authors should discuss the results, particularly by comparing with the results reported in the literature. Quoting that the results are similar to those reported in the literature is not enough for a scientific discussion; instead, they need to focus on the points which are different from the literature. In other words, the authors should focus on the novelty of their work: how their work is different from available reports and how it is significant and important. > In such papers, the Conclusion should not be simply the summary of the paper (as the abstract is). The authors should briefly outline the past, present, and future of the research. How they design their research, and how the results can be useful for future studies. > > Reviewer #3: Overall, the paper is well written and the approach followed is clearly described. The work presented is thorough and the methodology followed is scientifically sound. The main drawback of the paper is that the originality of this work with respect to other works is not very clear. The fabrication of SWNTs by arc discharge methods is not a novel concept and neither is their application in field emission displays. The authors should better point out the originality of this work with respect to similar works that can be found in the literature. > Finally, the paper should be edited by someone proficient in the English language to eliminate grammatical errors. All spelling errors should also be corrected, both in the text and in the accompanying figures > > 请教：这种评述修改后再投此刊有戏吗？ 审稿人都没有具体意见，应该怎么改，请教达人。 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
这种情况还有戏吗
已经有11人回复
-
微信指数没变化，科研之友没阅读
已经有4人回复
-
同事接到电话了，我却没有
已经有4人回复
-
准备明年的基金了
已经有5人回复
-
今年的WR进展到哪一步了？
已经有6人回复
-
时间戳他又来了
已经有11人回复
-
小木虫看见有人已经知道结果了
已经有15人回复
-
这个自发加氧反应的机理是什么？
已经有6人回复
-
J-J-W不为人知的一面
已经有18人回复
-
没消息就是被刷了呗
已经有13人回复
pepperp
至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 40 (小学生)
- 金币: 45549.5
- 散金: 120
- 红花: 4
- 帖子: 35287
- 在线: 902.5小时
- 虫号: 72931
- 注册: 2005-06-06
- 专业: 生物材料
2楼2010-04-06 10:54:07
nosema
木虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 6 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 1597.5
- 散金: 4211
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 837
- 在线: 161.4小时
- 虫号: 714690
- 注册: 2009-03-04
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 病原真菌学
3楼2010-04-06 11:03:40
今天我也收到了相似的审稿意见，没有具体的说法，怎么办呢？
4楼2010-04-06 11:31:33
fantouwen
金虫 (小有名气)
将军
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 1401.8
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 90
- 在线: 172.2小时
- 虫号: 745251
- 注册: 2009-04-10
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 凝聚态物性I:结构、力学和
5楼2010-04-06 11:38:43
shes
金虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 12 (小学生)
- 金币: 1151.8
- 散金: 1280
- 帖子: 1233
- 在线: 156.2小时
- 虫号: 730605
- 注册: 2009-03-25
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 机械测试理论与技术
6楼2010-04-06 12:01:09
7楼2010-04-06 12:12:22
zhaoligood
专家顾问 (正式写手)
Chemical NMRer
-
专家经验: +63 - 应助: 45 (小学生)
- 金币: 4695.3
- 散金: 1190
- 红花: 35
- 帖子: 1000
- 在线: 321.7小时
- 虫号: 555223
- 注册: 2008-05-08
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 结构化学
- 管辖: 留学DIY
8楼2010-04-06 12:20:45
9楼2010-04-06 12:26:45
xiaohuaiqiu
铁杆木虫 (知名作家)
Prof.
- 应助: 120 (高中生)
- 金币: 10909.1
- 散金: 36
- 红花: 18
- 帖子: 5648
- 在线: 437.7小时
- 虫号: 362660
- 注册: 2007-05-05
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 食品科学基础
10楼2010-04-06 12:29:58