| 查看: 5573 | 回复: 71 | |||
| 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 | |||
[交流]
一篇文章收到审稿意见,散金币赞人品
|
|||
|
爱思维尔的期刊,我们专业的标杆性杂志,编辑给的是revise,不过审稿人感觉给的修改量还是不小的。大伙看看审稿人的态度?大家别光顾着拿金币,给点实际的看法 Dear Professor **, The reviewers have commented on your above paper. They indicated that it is not acceptable for publication in its present form. However, if you feel that you can suitably address the reviewers' comments (included below), I invite you to revise and resubmit your manuscript. Please carefully address the issues raised in the comments. If you are submitting a revised manuscript, please also: a) outline each change made (point by point) as raised in the reviewer comments AND/OR b) provide a suitable rebuttal to each reviewer comment not addressed To submit your revision, please do the following: 1. Go to: http://ees.elsevier.com/jijr/ 2. Enter your login details 3. Click [Author Login] This takes you to the Author Main Menu. 4. Click [Submissions Needing Revision] I look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Please proceed to the following link to update your personal classifications and keywords, if necessary: Yours sincerely, ** ** Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: This paper suggests new GAX cycle. Totally, You need more explanations for your results. Please revise the paper followed by the comments. 1. Chapter 2 It is difficult to understand the GAX cycle only from the schematic flow. Show us the driving state point using such as schematic during diagram and so on. 2. Chapter 3 In assumptions, you show simulation conditions, too. In current situation, it is difficult to know what are simulation conditions. Please show us the simulation conditions separately. 3. Chapter 3 Your model only considers the mass and heat balance. Don't you have to consider the pressure drop for refrigerant line? 4. Chapter 5 You need more figures to explain your results -temperatures, pressures, heat transfer rates and concentraitons and so on-. Only from the results of the mass flow rates, it is difficult to understand the advantage of your new cycle. 5. New cycle seems to be too complex. Can you actually realize this cycle? Reviewer #2: This paper proposed an improved GAC cycle to utilize low grade absorption heat, and obtained 20% higher COP than the SGAX cycle. However, the authors should clarify the validation of the model in more detail. The author just compared the COPs from the literature. They must validate it by experimental results or thermal conditions including T, P, x and the COP from the litertaure. [ Last edited by longzai on 2011-1-20 at 08:51 ] |
» 猜你喜欢
极限拉扯,如何抉择
已经有5人回复
课题组会帮你通过考核么?
已经有6人回复
OpenAI又攻克数学难题了,离AI做有机合成还有多远?
已经有7人回复
售一区SCI文章T0P,我:8O.551.O54,科目全,可十急
已经有9人回复
售SCI一区文章,我:8O5.5.1.O5.4,科目全,可伽急
已经有10人回复
售SCI一区T0P文章,我:8.O55.1.O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有8人回复
售SCI一区T0P文章,我:8.O55.1.O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有9人回复
售SCI一区文章,我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急
已经有7人回复
售SCI文章,我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有10人回复
售SCI一区T0P文章,我:8.O.55.1.O54,科目全,可伽急
已经有9人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:
散金币攒人品
已经有186人回复
散金币,为自己的国基攒人品
已经有267人回复
自己的第一篇SCI,被Appl. Phys. lett接收。散金币,攒人品。100金币(已完结)
已经有159人回复
申请联培 今天收到第一个offer 但是不想去 散点金币攒人品
已经有186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
审稿意见返回,有个审稿人要求参考他的一篇文章
已经有10人回复
收到修改意见,文章状态仍然是要求审稿专家评审,怎么办
已经有4人回复
一篇文章major revision后,审稿意见已经回来1周了,还是没有消息
已经有23人回复
第一篇SCI审稿意见回来,郁闷了,散点金币,求安慰
已经有304人回复
我给国外期刊文章的审稿结果和审稿意见
已经有178人回复
» 抢金币啦!回帖就可以得到:
2026年人文教育与社会发展国际会议(HESD 2026)
+1/856
深圳|91年IT研发,期待一份不必伪装的长久陪伴。
+5/415
深圳|91年IT研发,期待一份不必伪装的长久陪伴
+5/395
中国农大 课题组招收2027年9月入学的考核制博士生
+5/135
[Sensors] 特刊征稿
+1/95
沈阳工业大学 环境电化学技术研究团队 招收硕士研究生(学硕/专硕)
+2/76
中国科大-合肥国家实验室冷原子量子网络团队招聘启事
+2/74
[Mathematics] 特刊征稿
+1/46
[Complex & Intelligent Systems] 专刊征稿
+1/45
爱丁顿实验
+1/33
高分辨质谱测试丨科研单位对外服务
+1/20
蛋白翻译后修饰:解码细胞功能调控的分子密码
+1/5
生物发酵罐气体智能管控,层流质量流量控制器如何赋能?
+1/5
委托检验的安全锁:质量保证协议,你签了吗?
+1/3
ICoEP(教育与心理学国际会议)
+1/2
ICoAAD(建筑、艺术与设计)
+1/2
仪器验证全生命周期管理:检测数据精准与否的前提
+1/2
细胞检定样品,您用对了吗?
+1/2
单细胞VDJ测序:从B细胞库中精准挖掘抗体药优势克隆
+1/1
CAHSS(艺术、人文与社会科学国际会议)
+1/1
44楼2011-01-20 08:55:50
2楼2011-01-20 08:27:34
3楼2011-01-20 08:32:44
5楼2011-01-20 08:35:05
简单回复
2011-01-20 08:37
回复
longzai(金币+1):谢谢参与












回复此楼
