| 查看: 1610 | 回复: 7 | |||
[交流]
第一次投，帮忙看看审稿意见，有没有希望 已有6人参与
|
|
投Energy Conversion and Management，等了220天，忍不住昨天催稿了，今天给了结果，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» 猜你喜欢
材料，纺织，生物（0856、0710），化学招生啦
已经有7人回复
-
301求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
281求调剂（0805）
已经有7人回复
-
材料与化工求调剂
已经有6人回复
-
299求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
277调剂
已经有6人回复
-
341求调剂
已经有7人回复
-
328求调剂，英语六级551，有科研经历
已经有8人回复
-
293求调剂
已经有12人回复
-
070300化学319求调剂
已经有4人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 急，请大家帮忙看看这个审稿意见，困惑.......
已经有13人回复
- 请各位帮忙看以下审稿意见，不知道如何修改！
已经有3人回复
- 【求助】有劳虫友高手帮忙看看acs审稿意见，多谢！
已经有5人回复
- 投稿有答复了，些许激动请大家帮忙看看，谢谢大家！（在13楼增加第二封审稿意见）
已经有32人回复
- 帮忙看下审稿意见
已经有6人回复
- 投了一篇文章，审稿结果是“major revision”，帮忙看看评审意见，有戏没？
已经有32人回复
- 审稿意见回来了，大家帮忙看一下。。
已经有9人回复
- 【求助】帮我看看审稿人的意见是否又接受的希望
已经有22人回复
- 文章的审稿意见，大家帮忙看看！
已经有6人回复
- 大家帮忙看这样的审稿意见还有必要改吗，还是改投别的期刊呀！
已经有23人回复
- 请各位投稿达人帮忙看一下这个审稿意见
已经有7人回复
- 虫友们帮忙看看审稿意见哦
已经有13人回复
- 审稿意见，大家帮忙看看
已经有8人回复
- 请大家帮忙看看如何回复审稿意见
已经有4人回复
- 求帮忙看下审稿意见
已经有9人回复
- 审稿意见回来，一个审稿人让据，编辑说大修，大家帮我看看希望大不
已经有24人回复
- 计算机学报具体审稿结果出来了，各位虫虫帮忙看看有希望不？
已经有21人回复
2楼2010-08-06 12:43:27
3楼2010-08-06 13:14:21
4楼2010-08-06 15:21:26
5楼2010-08-06 15:32:08
6楼2010-08-06 17:00:08
7楼2010-08-06 17:19:20
liaowb03
至尊木虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 242 (大学生)
- 金币: 16093.6
- 散金: 2137
- 红花: 8
- 帖子: 7310
- 在线: 612.2小时
- 虫号: 144671
- 注册: 2005-12-23
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 观赏园艺学
8楼2010-08-06 17:26:08
