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    

小木虫论坛-学术科研互动平台 » 学术交流区 » 论文投稿 » 交流 » 稿子拒了，一个审稿人，散BB求分析
51/1返回列表
查看: 3804  |  回复: 53
只看楼主 @他人 存档 新回复提醒 (忽略) 收藏    在APP中查看
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

lucktime

木虫 (正式写手)

[交流] 稿子拒了，一个审稿人，散BB求分析

General comments:

Good introduction and use of relevant references. The site description is also good and the methodology used is well described. However, there is not much new here in terms of techniques used. More importantly, the analysis of the data is primarily of the type "curve-plotting" with very little detailed analysis. The data seems to be of good quality and as such, I feel that the authors could have done more with it, e.g.,***省略, etc. The discussion chapter is very general and deals with issues that are not shown in the results cahpter, and sometimes not supported by the data. The conclusions presented are also mostly qualiative and (in some cases) not clearly supported by the data presented. Recommendations (both practical for the mine site as well as for continued work) are lacking.


Some additional specific comments:  ,***省略


EDITOR'S DECISION:

The editor suggest rejection with resubmission. The dataset and case study are interesting but the general analysis and discussion is poor and not novel. More could be done also to provide to the reader some clear statement about what it is adviced or what can be done or not to monitor, study and forecast the evolution
So the authors should take their time to improve the manuscript for a resubmission to the journal
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:

» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:

查看全部散金贴
1楼 2011-10-08 11:39:44
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

aaaa4564

木虫 (正式写手)
★
lucktime(金币+1):谢谢参与
引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by seapass at 2011-10-08 11:43:37:
讨论重新好好写，重点突出你文章的亮点和重要发现，不要表面地分析数据，简单地引用文献，要深入讨论，挖掘出你的statement。最好选择重新投这个期刊。祝好运!

有道理，楼主好好再写一下文章
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
30楼2011-10-08 12:42:47
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 54 个回答

seapass

至尊木虫 (职业作家)
★
lucktime(金币+1):谢谢参与
讨论重新好好写，重点突出你文章的亮点和重要发现，不要表面地分析数据，简单地引用文献，要深入讨论，挖掘出你的statement。最好选择重新投这个期刊。祝好运!
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
2楼2011-10-08 11:43:37
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

chenlj8331

铁杆木虫 (正式写手)
★
lucktime(金币+1):谢谢参与
引用回帖:
1楼: Originally posted by lucktime at 2011-10-08 11:39:44:
General comments:

Good introduction and use of relevant references. The site description is also good and the methodology used is well described. However, there is not much new here in terms of  ...

修改后，重投，希望还是很大的。
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
4楼2011-10-08 11:47:23
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

mlanqiang

木虫之王 (文学泰斗)
★
lucktime(金币+1):谢谢参与
数据有点少，重新分析，重新讨论，很多讨论与数据有脱节现象。修改后重新投吧。
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
8楼2011-10-08 11:58:02
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
简单回复
leipei.12313楼
2011-10-08 12:12   回复  
lucktime(金币+1):谢谢参与
查看全部 54 个回答
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