24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

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

xwp3304

金虫 (小有名气)

应助: 4 (幼儿园)
金币: 785.1
帖子: 286
在线: 401.8小时
虫号: 1022833

[交流] 怎么回复审稿人？

大家有没有回复审稿人的格式呀？本人急需，希望中了论文的虫友帮帮忙呀！

回复此楼

» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐

百宝箱

找工作的那些事儿

好贴收藏

» 本帖已获得的红花（最新10朵）

lnlzhp

» 猜你喜欢

药学硕士，第一、第二作者已发表6 篇 SCI，药理方向及相关方向2026年/2027年博士申请已经有6人回复
一篇MDPI论文改变了学习工作和生活已经有5人回复
26年博士申请自荐-电催化已经有3人回复
中国地质大学（北京）博士招生补录，数理学院材料科学与工程专业和材料与化工专业已经有6人回复
收到国自然专家邀请后几年才会有本子送过来评已经有4人回复
考博已经有5人回复
26年申博自荐-计算机视觉已经有4人回复
药化及相关博士的申请已经有3人回复

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:

» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:

查看全部散金贴

1楼 2010-11-20 16:37:18

已阅回复此楼关注TA 给TA发消息送TA红花 TA的回帖

smartabc

铁杆木虫 (正式写手)

应助: 3 (幼儿园)
金币: 6486.4
帖子: 932
在线: 417.5小时
虫号: 662010

★ ★
xwp3304(金币+1):谢谢参与
xj850626(金币+1):鼓励交流 2010-11-20 17:51:30
xwp3304(金币+5): 2010-11-20 19:27:57

List of Responses
Dear Editors and Reviewers:Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Paper Title” (ID: 文章稿号). Those comments are valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:
Responds to the reviewer’s comments:
Reviewer #1: 1. Response to comment: (??简要列出意见??)Response: ××××××2. Response to comment: (??简要列出意见??)Response: ××××××。。。。。。逐条意见回答，切忌一定不能有遗漏针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用：We are very sorry for our negligence of ??...We are very sorry for our incorrect writing ??...It is really true as Reviewer suggested that??We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comments.We have re-written this part according to the Reviewer’s suggestionAs Reviewer suggested that??Considering the Reviewer’s suggestion, we have ??最后特意感谢一下这个审稿人的意见：Special thanks to you for your good comments.
Reviewer #2: 同上述
Reviewer #3: ××××××Other changes: 1. Line 60-61, the statements of “……” were corrected as “…………”2. Line 107, “……” was added 3. Line 129, “……” was deleted ×××××× We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper.We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.