24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 2229  |  回复: 8
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

mrsmile90

新虫 (初入文坛)

[求助] 第一次投Electronics letter,被拒有审稿意见,求救大侠

小弟本科生,研究纳米材料场发射,跟导师投了一篇论文到Electronics letter,一个月被拒,有审稿意见(如下),听说这个letter退稿很少给意见。
求助各位不知道按审稿意见修改后,再投是否有戏。或者转投其他?求助!求助!

The paper is clearly expressed, the principles are sound and the Letter shows a way of reducing damage by transient current. However, in the simulation plot of Fig. 2(b), the experimental rate of decay of current from the maxima at A and B appears much greater than the simulated value. This may be because the capacitance C used in simulation is larger than the experimental value. If the simulated C is reduced to obtain closer agreement, the value of the Letter will be increased. Also in Fig. 3(b), there is qualitative agreement of the transients but the low-frequency response is not well simulated. The reason for this is not easy to see because no values have been reported for Re and Rsource, but possibly Rsource should be larger in the simulation. The authors are invited to repeat the simulations with different C and Rsource, and either to show closer agreement or to suggest reasons why Fig. 3(b) simulation does not agree well with experiment.
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关商家推荐: (我也要在这里推广)

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

A+

铁杆木虫 (知名作家)

赞一个
5楼2011-07-31 12:08:00
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 mrsmile90 的主题更新
信息提示
请填处理意见