|
|
忍不住昨天催稿了，结果要修改，第一次投不知道下面的结果是好是坏，另外，他的意思是不是要改一下参考文献和增加一个精度的表格就好了？哪位指点下，谢谢。
Thank you for sending the paper, "******," for consideration by Energy Conversion and Management. I apologize for the lengthy period of review. The reviews are now complete, and, unfortunately, they are not completely favorable. Therefore, the paper cannot be published in Energy Conversion and Management as it is presently written. I have consolidated the comments of the three reviewers below in the hope that they will be helpful to you.
In order to be acceptable for publication in the archival literature, a significant contribution, something new or improved, is required in addition to the work being correct and of high quality. Eighteen references, none of which were published by Energy Conversion and Management, are listed, and 16 of the 18 references are cited in the Introduction during the critique of the pertinent literature. The critique of the literature has identified a significant contribution to the archival literature that this work possibly could provide, namely ******. Nevertheless, the papers needs to be improved somewhat before it can be accepted for publication. Citations of multiple references, like [2-15], are totally useless when evaluating the archival literature to identify some deficiency this work can address because of their lack of specificity. The purpose of citations in a paper is two-fold: (1) to credit the source of a statement or information, or (2) to provide a starting point for an interested reader to explore a topic further. Be specific in citations. Citations of multiple references do not indicate anything other than carelessness. A reference should be cited for any standards employed. Figure 4 is blank. Any item mentioned that bears a scientist's name, or any other non-descriptive name, must be accompanied with a brief description and a citation of a listed reference in which the item may be found fully explained unless the item may be regarded as universally known among scientists. The measurement accuracies of all sensors must be provided. Then, these measurement accuracies must be used to estimate the uncertainties in all calculated experimental information. A table of the accuracies and uncertainties is a good way to present this information. If these few concerns are addressed completely, carefully and successfully in a revised paper, such revised paper very probably will be acceptable for publication.
A separate file containing the detailed responses of the authors to the review comments and the resulting revisions of the manuscript must be submitted on EES. After having submitted the separate response file, another separate file containing the revised manuscript must be submitted on EES. Thus two entirely separate files, and only two, must be submitted on EES (nothing should be submitted in author comments and the separate response file must not be included in the revised manuscript separate file).
I hope these comments will be helpful to you. My sense of the reviewers' comments is that there is an excellent basis on which I can recommend that this paper be revised and re-submitted to Energy Conversion and Management. Thank you again for sending this paper to Energy Conversion and Management for consideration. |
|
回复此楼