[交流] 申述信... 已有5人参与

最近投scripta mater. 被reject了。看了一下审稿人的意见，感觉这个审稿人不是我所研究领域的，遂起写了一篇申述信，不知道有没有用，但是感觉还是应该尝试一下，大家看看我怎么写可以吗？给点意见 Dear Prof.**, Our manuscript titled ** was submitted to Scripta Materialia and was rejected after sending out for review. We would like to thank the editor and the reviewer for giving us constructive suggestions which would help us in depth to improve the quality of the paper. However, we think there are no sufficient reasons in the decision letter for us to accept the conclusion and the reviewer seems to misunderstand the purpose of our study. Our paper is studying **. This is a significant aspect in the field of**. Some characteristics of Ti alloys under impact loading are completely different from those under conventional processing conditions, such as super plasticity, ultrafine grains and amorphization. The phase transformation of Ti alloys is really complex, and as regard to omega phase transformation, there are two types: althermal omega phase and isothermal omega phase. This paper is precisely observed the althermal omega phase transformation in Ti alloys during **. There are two innovations here: one is**for the first time and the other one is **. We believe that our investigation is a good work with scientific meaning on materials dynamic behavior and fit for the purpose of Scripta Materialia, although the evidences may be insufficient in our manuscript. The followings are our opinions toward to the reviewer comments. We really appreciate you if you can read it and have reconsideration towards our manuscript. Sincerely yours, ** [ Last edited by 江枫2008 on 2010-9-26 at 10:29 ]

回复此楼