| 查看: 2779 | 回复: 24 | ||
mikko梦至尊木虫 (著名写手)
|
[求助]
请问这是审稿人的意见还是编辑的意见（投稿十天后给发的邮件），中的可能性大吗？
|
|
Sample TextThe 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/jolt/ 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. Yours sincerely, Andrea Cusano, Ph.D Optoelectronics Receiving Editor Optics & Laser Technology Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: The manuscript combines the metallurgy of the laser treated surfaces and the fatigue response of the workpieces. I would suggest the following amendments in the manuscript: - The experimental error associated with the fatigue tests should be given in the manuscript and the error bars should be included in figures 5-12. - The morphology of the specimen surface is very important (even more important than that of below the surface) in fatigue tests. The cellular structures as shown in figures 3 and 4 can be formed below the surface and it is not exactly composing of the dendritic structures. Unequal sizes of the cellular structures indicate the unevenly cooling rates in the laser treated region. This issue has to be addressed in the manuscript. In addition, SEM micrographs showing the surface morphology due to different melt profiles will be useful. - I would recommend that authors may include the following papers International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 49 (9-12), pp. 1009-1018, 2010. Reviewer #2: This manuscript discussed the thermal fatigue behavior of hot-work steel processed by laser technique. The material, sample preparation, experimental method, etc were described detailed by the author. But this manuscript was similar to a report of experiment. There were the points should be paid more attention to next time: (1) The tense was not uniform of the full text. In 3.3, the first sentence used present tense and the second sentence used the past tense. The same situation appeared in 3.3.1.1. (2) Subject and verb were not match In abstract, if the subject was "the thermal fatigue behavior", the verb matched it cannot be find. In 3.2, Fig. 4 shows..., Fig.4(a)-(c) shows... In 3.5, Fig. 13(a)-(b) are., Fig. 14a is. (3) The format was not uniform of the full text. In 3.5, Fig. 14a is., . in Fig. 15(a). In 3.2, Formula given by (1)., in 3.3.1.2 .as followed formula [2]. (4) The structure of the paper was too complicate. (5) Although the materials was processed by laser, but it just mentioned YAG laser and maximum 300w. We did not know the specific parameters of the laser beam during experiments, such as the power, the beam quality, beam size, beam shape, etc. (6) The "remarkable improvement" mentioned in the abstract is obscure. Did it mention the conclusions of this paper or the biomimetic method? |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
285求调剂
已经有12人回复
-
求调剂
已经有6人回复
-
085600材料与化工301分求调剂院校
已经有19人回复
-
277工科求调剂
已经有11人回复
-
277求调剂 数一104分
已经有13人回复
-
304求调剂
已经有10人回复
-
336求调剂，一志愿中科大
已经有6人回复
-
071000生物学，一志愿深圳大学296分，求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
一志愿北京化工085600 310分求调剂
已经有19人回复
-
274求调剂求调剂
已经有7人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 一审意见是大修，内附审稿意见，诸位大神帮忙看看发表的可能性大吗？
已经有4人回复
- 可以直接联系审稿人么？
已经有25人回复
- 审稿人给出的意见是extensive English revision，这是让我大范围修改语言吗？
已经有17人回复
- 会议论文一个审稿接受，一个建议修改，另一个直接拒绝，录用的可能性还大吗
已经有4人回复
- 审稿人意见不统一 编辑一般会怎么处理
已经有12人回复
- SCI论文一审回来审稿人意见相差非常大如何修改？
已经有19人回复
- 为什么审稿人意见是大修而被编辑拒了呢？
已经有11人回复
- SCI论文审稿结束之后，按意见修改之后，会不会再返到审稿人手里
已经有32人回复
- SCI期刊是不是审稿人把审稿意见发给编辑就会通知
已经有14人回复
- Optics Letters投稿一周收到编辑回信怎么只有一个审稿人的意见
已经有7人回复
- 这样的审稿意见可以申诉吗？
已经有20人回复
- IECR期刊的，编辑给的意见中，下面这段话我不太懂，麻烦兄弟姐妹们帮忙
已经有7人回复
- 编辑已经催了审稿人5次 依然不返回审稿意见 大家遇到过这种情况么
已经有50人回复
- 评审者同意接受了，但编辑要求按审稿人意见minor revisions，怎么改？
已经有11人回复
- 初审意见两个审稿人，一个强调创新性不强，一个要求大修. 该 怎样回复啊？ 谢谢
已经有39人回复
- 一审意见回来了，一个审稿人竭力推荐发表，另一个认为无新意...
已经有34人回复
- 大修之后还会送原来的审稿人吗？
已经有12人回复
- 有一个审稿人意见明显拒了,但编辑给的是小修,录用机率有多少?
已经有29人回复
- 审稿人说文章不符合杂志的要求，编辑据稿，申述可能性！
已经有26人回复
- 论文被拒，但编辑说按审稿人的意见修改后再重新提交还是有可能会接受
已经有25人回复
- 按照审稿人的意见进行了修改之后，编辑的回复
已经有3人回复
- 编辑在什么情况下会选用自己推荐的审稿人
已经有16人回复
- 推荐的一个审稿人明显让他的学生来审稿，意见直接影响编辑决定，有必要申诉吗
已经有18人回复
- 审稿意见回来，一个审稿人让据，编辑说大修，大家帮我看看希望大不
已经有24人回复
avad
铁杆木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 38 (小学生)
- 贵宾: 0.057
- 金币: 19026.7
- 散金: 105
- 红花: 10
- 帖子: 2815
- 在线: 1166.3小时
- 虫号: 271176
- 注册: 2006-08-12
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 金属材料表面科学与工程
2楼2011-10-07 17:39:20
zhiqiancsu
金虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 2301
- 红花: 3
- 帖子: 902
- 在线: 54.9小时
- 虫号: 1426148
- 注册: 2011-10-03
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 钢铁冶金
3楼2011-10-07 18:07:15
putin092910
木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 170 (高中生)
- 金币: 274.4
- 散金: 4755
- 红花: 23
- 帖子: 2815
- 在线: 602.8小时
- 虫号: 774316
- 注册: 2009-05-19
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 催化化学
4楼2011-10-07 18:09:55
nkb_hit
木虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 3 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 3792.7
- 散金: 686
- 红花: 11
- 帖子: 403
- 在线: 660.3小时
- 虫号: 832103
- 注册: 2009-08-21
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 金属结构材料
5楼2011-10-07 18:13:49
yangkee
铁杆木虫 (职业作家)
- 应助: 21 (小学生)
- 金币: 13133.8
- 散金: 5415
- 红花: 5
- 帖子: 3242
- 在线: 295.2小时
- 虫号: 1043579
- 注册: 2010-06-18
- 专业: 水工结构和材料及施工
6楼2011-10-07 18:17:04
mikko梦(金币+1): 2011-10-07 20:57:56
|
本帖内容被屏蔽 |
7楼2011-10-07 18:52:40
mlg186
金虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 1 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 1409.3
- 散金: 274
- 红花: 2
- 帖子: 423
- 在线: 161.1小时
- 虫号: 1303015
- 注册: 2011-05-22
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 半导体晶体与薄膜材料
8楼2011-10-07 19:23:13
hithithit628
金虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 20 (小学生)
- 金币: 3459.6
- 散金: 1376
- 红花: 8
- 帖子: 1016
- 在线: 439.1小时
- 虫号: 453502
- 注册: 2007-11-07
- 专业: 电化学
9楼2011-10-07 19:26:24
mlanqiang
木虫之王 (文学泰斗)
蓝博士
- 应助: 3409 (副教授)
- 金币: 55278.8
- 散金: 5498
- 红花: 62
- 帖子: 73916
- 在线: 730.8小时
- 虫号: 302202
- 注册: 2006-12-02
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 胶体与界面化学
10楼2011-10-07 19:52:47
