24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
查看: 3125  |  回复: 34
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

striveme

铁杆木虫 (正式写手)

[交流] 谁见过这样的审稿意见?已有26人参与

最近的一篇投稿,得到的审稿意见如下,编辑让major reversion,各位大神给点建议.怎么个搞法?
Dear Prof. XXX:
Thank you for submitting your manuscript for publication in The XXX. It has been examined by expert reviewers who have concluded that the work is of potential interest to the readership of The XXX; however, it appears that a major revision, possibly followed by further reviewer evaluation, will be needed prior to its further consideration for publication. Please see the enclosed reviewers' reports for details regarding the requested changes and/or additions.
------------------------------------
Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:
Reviewer: 1
Recommendation: This paper is not recommended because it does not provide new physical insights.
Comments:
The authors studied XXX. The group has used this method to study polymer chains in solutions. Now they switched to small surfactant molecules. Such a system has been well studied in colloidal research. The method is a commercial instrument. I do not see that a combination of this system and this method has led us anything new. Yes, they did lots of measurement and summarize their results into some figures. That’s it! This is a simple laboratory report, not a scientific paper. Where are sciences? My guess is that these two authors just try to publish one more paper.
Reviewer: 2
Recommendation: This paper represents a significant new contribution and should be published as is.
Comments:
This is a timely report that contains high-quality experimental data and appropriate interpretation. There are very few papers dealing with the kinetics  transitions and this is an excellent contribution to the field of self-assembly. I recommend publication in XXX without any changes.
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包,谢谢回帖交流
31楼2010-09-12 15:51:43
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 striveme 的主题更新
普通表情 高级回复(可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见