应《网络安全法》要求，自2017年10月1日起，未进行实名认证将不得使用互联网跟帖服务。为保障您的帐号能够正常使用，请尽快对帐号进行手机号验证，感谢您的理解与支持！

24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
小木虫论坛-学术科研互动平台 » 学术交流区 » 论文投稿 » 交流 » 修改后再投可以吗？
51/1返回列表
查看: 2022  |  回复: 8
只看楼主@他人 存档 新回复提醒 (忽略) 收藏    在APP中查看
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

catsupport

木虫 (著名写手)

[交流] 修改后再投可以吗？已有7人参与

这样的审稿意见老板要求我根据审稿人的意见修改了再尝试投一次，有经验的虫友们支招一下，成功的几率如何？现将编辑的回信附上：
Thank you for submitting your manuscript for publication in The Journal of Physical Chemistry. It has been examined by expert reviewers whose reviews are enclosed. After careful consideration of their comments (and my own evaluation of the manuscript), I am unable to accept the manuscript for publication in The Journal of Physical Chemistry.

While your work appears to have been carried out with care, unfortunately, we are unable to accept all of the sound work submitted to the journal. We appreciate your choice of The Journal of Physical Chemistry as a possible forum for presentation of your work.

With sincere regards,

Prof. Catherine Murphy
Senior Editor
The Journal of Physical Chemistry
Phone: 803-777-4332
Fax: 202-513-8768
Editor Email: jphyschem@chem.sc.edu


Reviewer: 1

Recommendation: This paper is not recommended because it does not provide new physical insights.

Comments:
This work mainly contains two sections: xx synthesis and characterization, and the investigation on the catalytic activity of as-prepared xx toward the degradation of  xx in aqueous solution in the presence of H2O2. The first part of the work was studied systematically and the related resulted was characterized by a range of techniques, however, as far as the method is concerned, the novelty is limited. The investigation on the catalytic activity of xx toward the degradation of xx is interesting, however, the evidence for chemical oxidation degradation of Xx by H2O2 in the presence of xx is not convincing. The morphology of xx can not change substantially after absorbing XO, furthermore, the sulfur element can also not be detected by EDS as S on the surface is limited. The statement “which indicating no Xx molecule on the surface of the xx” is not accurate due to the fact that xx have high absorption ability, if IR measurement was performed, the characteristic peaks of XO could be observed. Based on above reasons, I do not recommend this Ms published in The Journal of Physical Chemistry. Some other comments are demonstrated as follows:
1.Page 21 line 32, “Figure 2. (A), (B), (c), (D);” should be “Figure 2. (a), (b), (c) and (d)”, authors should use them unitedly in the whole Ms.
2.Page 11, line 24, “It is well know” should be “It is well known”
3.I don’t agree with the authors’ statement that the xx.
4.Page 14, line 22, “SEM and EDS were used to obverse the surface” should be “SEM and EDS were used to observe the surface”




Reviewer: 2

Recommendation: This paper is probably publishable, but should be reviewed again in revised form before it is accepted.

Comments:
The authors report that xx are synthesized and their catalytic degradation properties are also desirable. These results are interesting in the paper, but the following points should be considered by the authors.
1. Considering main feature of the produced structure is “xx” and it affects the xx properties and catalytic effects of sample, a test to measure the specific area of samples may be necessary, and the distribution of the pore size is also interesting.
2. Page 8, Lines 14-17. “…the
3. Page 14, Lines 42-50. There are not experimental data support the The final sentence in the Conclusions. Thus I suggest the authors delete it.
4. Page 4, “However, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, there are few reports on the synthesis of xx.” The authors should delete it because the xx have been synthesized by a different method from the author’s.

In addition, “NaAc” in the Abstract may be replaced with “sodium acetate”; Ref. 58 is not correct.

有虫友们遇到过类似上述意见的审稿判决吗？这是本人第一篇文章，从选题，思路和实验方案的确立，实验实施，数据处理和分析以及初稿写作到论文定稿都是自己一手操办，老板只是最终指示投稿！！结果被拒了真的特别难受！！
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:
1楼2010-11-06 10:45:05
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

catsupport

木虫 (著名写手)
potential reviewer是自己找的，不过编辑是否选用作者推荐的审稿人说不准
赞一下 回复此楼
8楼2011-07-01 19:15:03
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 9 个回答

polestar007

至尊木虫 (职业作家)
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖交流
为什么非要一棵树上吊死呢？
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
匏土革，木石金。丝与竹，乃八音。
2楼2010-11-06 10:48:17
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

visitor958

至尊木虫 (文坛精英)

IEEE杂志与会议专家
★ ★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖交流
xj850626(金币+1):鼓励交流 2010-11-06 14:14:42
这个杂志，包括主编，对你这个很不感兴趣，换个杂志吧，除非你真的增加很多新内容，等于写一篇新文章。

"as far as the method is concerned, the novelty is limited. The investigation on the catalytic activity of xx toward the degradation of xx is interesting, however, the evidence for chemical oxidation degradation of Xx by H2O2 in the presence of xx is not convincing. The morphology of xx can not change substantially after absorbing XO, furthermore, the sulfur element can also not be detected by EDS as S on the surface is limited. The statement “which indicating no Xx molecule on the surface of the xx” is not accurate due to the fact that xx have high absorption ability, if IR measurement was performed, the characteristic peaks of XO could be observed. "
引用回帖:
Originally posted by catsupport at 2010-11-06 10:45:05:
这样的审稿意见老板要求我根据审稿人的意见修改了再尝试投一次，有经验的虫友们支招一下，成功的几率如何？现将编辑的回信附上：
Thank you for submitting your manuscript for publication in The Journal of  ...

赞一下(2人) 回复此楼
3楼2010-11-06 11:01:45
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

ttyy

金虫 (正式写手)
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖
我也想投这个,想请问楼主potential reviewers是要写自己知道的,还是在他们的reviewers选啊?
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
6楼2011-07-01 18:27:47
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 9 个回答
普通表情 龙 兔 虎 猫 高级回复(可上传附件)
信息提示
关闭
请填处理意见
关闭