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 » -----------------------------------------
101/1返回列表
查看: 2290  |  回复: 9
只看楼主@他人 存档 新回复提醒 (忽略) 收藏    在APP中查看

lalala1234

铜虫 (小有名气)

[交流] -----------------------------------------已有4人参与

Dear xx

I'm afraid I must reject your submission for publication in Journal of
> Power Sources.
>
> For your guidance, please find attached the reviewers' comments.
>
> IF you decide to resubmit there must be SUBSTANTIAL changes made.  If you
> resubmit:
>
> 1) You MUST make clear that if it is a resubmission of this paper in the
> covering letter and ALSO enter "This is a resubmission of paper #_____ "
> (add the rejected paper number) in the author's "ENTER COMMENTS" box when
> submitting.  Each of the current reviewer criticisms must be answered
> clearly and separately in an accompanying letter (listing each reviewer
> comment and your answer and your correction) and,
> 2) Changes made in response to the reviewers must be identified in the new
> text by highlighting with colour or by underlining.
> 3) NOTE: "A high standard of English is a criterion of acceptance for
> publication"
> or the paper will be rejected (http://ees.elsevier.com/power/default.asp).
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Chris Dyer
> Editor
> Journal of Power Sources
>
> Journal of Power Sources, Editorial Office
> E-mail: power@elsevier.com
>
> Reviewers' comments:
>
>
> Review:
>
> 2. Is it a new and original contribution? If not, please specify. No
>
> 3. Does it contain material that might well be omitted? If so, please
> specify.
>
> 4. Is the manuscript clearly presented and well organized? No
>
> 5. Does the manuscript give adequate references to related work? Yes
>
> 6. Is the English satisfactory? No
>
> 7. Are the illustrations and tables all necessary and adequate? No
>
> 8. Is the summary adequate and informative? No
>
> 9. Are the conclusions sound and justified? No
>
> 10. Please list any additional confidential comments to the Editor:
>
> 11. Do the Research Highlights reflect the contents of the manuscript?
>
> 12. What is your recommendation?  Reject
>
>
>
> This manuscript is not recommended for publication.  The focus on this
> paper appears to be the material characterization of the polymer
> created.  However, the author does not appear to account for deleterious
> effects of water on lithium batteries. The methods note relative humidity,
> which really should have no effect on the testing of a dry system.
> Additionally the reviewer is not convinced that the as tested electrolyte
> is even dry.
> With regards to the electrochemical testing the assumptions of impedance
> spectroscopy do not work for analysis at 100 mV.  The magnitude needs to
> be either <10 mV or >120 mV.  Secondly no interest is paid in
> distinguishing which ion(s) is in fact mobile in the electrolyte.  Only
> one, Li+, is of interest and it needs to be looked at with special
> concern.
> Grammatically and spelling wise there were a couple of minor mistakes
> wherein letters were in the wrong order, a careful proofreading will
> eliminate these.
Ultimately it is recommended that the authors submit
> this paper to a journal with a more materials intensive focus because the
> electrochemistry as it pertains to lithium batteries is tenuous at best.
>
>

-----------------------------------

[ Last edited by lalala1234 on 2012-2-22 at 21:55 ]
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢
1楼2011-06-21 05:38:16
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

mygalaxy1977

铜虫 (正式写手)
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖
如果你能很好回答审稿人的意见的话，最好resubmit,如果不能，改投他刊。
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
2楼2011-06-21 06:14:24
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

lalala1234

铜虫 (小有名气)
引用回帖:
Originally posted by mygalaxy1977 at 2011-06-21 06:14:24:
如果你能很好回答审稿人的意见的话，最好resubmit,如果不能，改投他刊。

这个挺难回答的，比方说，reviewer认为文章英语差，，，但是实际上这篇文章写了3年了。。。之前投过JACS，虽然悲剧，也没有说语言不好。
赞一下 回复此楼
3楼2011-06-21 07:11:58
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

lalala1234

铜虫 (小有名气)
之前投JACS的时候也是reject and resubmit..但是上次没有选择resubmit
赞一下 回复此楼
4楼2011-06-21 07:12:59
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

mygalaxy1977

铜虫 (正式写手)
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖
如果仅是语言问题，可以花钱找专业公司改一下。
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
5楼2011-06-21 07:14:24
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

lalala1234

铜虫 (小有名气)
引用回帖:
Originally posted by mygalaxy1977 at 2011-06-21 07:14:24:
如果仅是语言问题，可以花钱找专业公司改一下。

语言肯定没问题的啊，，我的合作者都是美国人，，导师是德国人。。。
我的意思是说，reviewer的一些comments确实比较难回答。。即使去反击，也很苍白，，我说我语言很好，，他坚持认为不好也没办法。
赞一下 回复此楼
6楼2011-06-21 07:31:59
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

mygalaxy1977

铜虫 (正式写手)
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖
引用回帖:
Originally posted by lalala1234 at 2011-06-21 07:31:59:
语言肯定没问题的啊，，我的合作者都是美国人，，导师是德国人。。。
我的意思是说，reviewer的一些comments确实比较难回答。。即使去反击，也很苍白，，我说我语言很好，，他坚持认为不好也没办法。

那就没有办法了，只好改投了。
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
7楼2011-06-21 08:49:30
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

nom8393

木虫 (著名写手)
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖
这个Review意见很凶残，LZ还是改投别的期刊吧。
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
8楼2011-06-21 17:44:21
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

jingminl

铁杆木虫 (著名写手)
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖
引用回帖:
Originally posted by lalala1234 at 2011-06-21 07:31:59:
语言肯定没问题的啊，，我的合作者都是美国人，，导师是德国人。。。
我的意思是说，reviewer的一些comments确实比较难回答。。即使去反击，也很苍白，，我说我语言很好，，他坚持认为不好也没办法。

为什么要反击呢？
编辑给了resubmit的机会，就是基本差不多了。
只要你认真回答每一个评审的意见就可以了。
只要你认真回答，少一些狡辩，评审一般不会太难为你的。
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
9楼2011-06-21 18:12:47
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

bear1984

木虫 (著名写手)
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖
第一个审稿人几乎完全毙掉了啊。。。
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
10楼2011-06-21 18:20:17
 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 lalala1234 的主题更新
101/1返回列表
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