| 查看: 2472 | 回复: 9 | |||
| 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]
论文被拒～大家看看问题出在哪儿呢 已有8人参与
|
|||
|
在投稿系统显示论文“Required Review Complete”一个月零一天后的今天收到了主编的拒稿邮件（曾在7月10号左右发过邮件给主编希望他能尽快的返回审稿意见）。邮件中主编说是根据审稿人意见作出的拒稿决定，但我看审稿人意见，除了英语需要修改外，其它没啥大问题，比如增加实验。但主编直接就拒了，还拒的很彻底。个人觉得他拒的很牵强，感觉应该给个修改后再审的机会。我把主编的邮件和审稿人的意见附在下面，大家看看问题出在哪儿了呢。 主编： Thank you for submitting your manuscript for possible publication in ×××. Following are the reviews for your paper referenced above. Based on the reviews, I regret that I cannot accept or further consider it for publication in ×××. Thank you for your interest in ×××. Sincerely, Dr. ××× Editor-in-Chief ××× 主编返回的审稿人意见： Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: First, English should be improved, many errors and sentences are too long that lead to a misunderstand. This paper was presented a methud that its name is ×××. this methud Does not change much with the previous methud. But There is little innovation, Where used from two-dimensional ××× in conjunction with the ××× image denoising algorithm. Formula 7 in page 10, is not a new formula of estimators. This formula was used previously. Finally this paper With a small change can become a good article. Sincerely, Reviewer #3: In the paper, ××× is used for denoising images. ×××（对论文方法的描述）. It is claimed that "The comparative experimental results for natural images and medical images show that the method introduced in the paper achieves better denoising performance, and that the accuracy and computational cost of the ××× image denoising algorithm are all improved." 1. As far as I can see, the formulations used in the paper seem to be O.K. 2. But the language used in the paper needs to be highly corrected. To show the locations of the linguistic mistakes, I attached a Word document in which the problematic words and phrases are colored into yellow. And probably there are more mistakes that I missed throughout the paper. 3. Instead of having a fixed 21x21 pixel search window, it would be interesting to see the effects of changing the window size. 4. In Table 1, as the author confessed, the method introduced in this paper does not outperform all other state-of-the art methods, but it still gives comparable performance results. Similar results are valid for Table 2. 5. It would be good to add the computation times of the method in Table 3 since it outperforms other denoising methods in PSNR every now and then. 6. Finally the last sentence in the "Abstract" should be corrected maybe by writing it as "Finally, the comparative experimental results show that our method achieves better denoising performance in some of the well known images and outperforms other methods in computational time in all images." 顺便提一句，审稿人2说他提供了一份指出我论文中语法错误之类的word文档，但主编咋个没有把这个文档返回给我呢... |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
有多少人是今天查系统知道结果的？
已经有17人回复
-
基金不中，共勉
已经有4人回复
-
国自然面上复盘~欢迎讨论
已经有5人回复
-
我不理解！
已经有23人回复
-
2026年的国家社科基金项目通讯评审的新规则与新动向、新挑战
已经有10人回复
-
系统查不到
已经有10人回复
-
怎么查啊
已经有5人回复
-
范进中举一文的中心思想
已经有10人回复
-
2026国自然函评费到账
已经有25人回复
-
2026年8月25日国自然放榜前突然收到列入评审专家邮件，有关系吗？
已经有28人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 烦劳牛人看一下这几句英语翻译哪里有问题，翻译板块人太少了，看看语法和结构也行。BB
已经有3人回复
- 求真相，大家看看这篇CCL英文文章是不是有问题
已经有19人回复
- 大家看看我的论文出什么问题，关于figure的cite位置。
已经有4人回复
- 大家帮我看看审稿人这个问题怎么回答？
已经有8人回复
- 一个咱们国家在国外留学的留学生写的，问题很大，实在想拒了。大家帮看看该不该拒。
已经有8人回复
- 大家看看的投稿的高度是不是有问题？？
已经有25人回复
- 【求助】水热法制备磷酸铁锂，大家帮我看看 问题出在哪
已经有35人回复
- 编辑指出文章的两大问题，大家帮我看看还有戏吗？还是委婉拒稿？
已经有8人回复
shiningboy
木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 12 (小学生)
- 金币: 1618.3
- 散金: 2673
- 红花: 8
- 帖子: 1688
- 在线: 429.4小时
- 虫号: 296266
- 注册: 2006-11-12
- 专业: 军事史
9楼2011-07-20 20:45:24
lele0131
金虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 4 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 26596.2
- 散金: 41
- 红花: 6
- 帖子: 2665
- 在线: 563.5小时
- 虫号: 549853
- 注册: 2008-04-22
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 工业工程与管理
2楼2011-07-20 18:56:19
我只是猜测呵呵，楼主好好跟编辑沟通下，争取下吧，祝好运，同时也祈祷我的论文能有好的结果 3楼2011-07-20 19:43:40
4楼2011-07-20 19:43:56
