| 查看: 1840 | 回复: 5 | ||
yuezhonghui木虫 (著名写手)
|
[求助]
【求助】有劳虫友高手帮忙看看acs审稿意见，多谢！
|
|
本人新手，还望虫友高手不吝赐教，小弟多谢！ 刚收到，不知接受希望大不大，是不是改好就能接收；有些问题有点尖锐，呵呵 Dear XXXX: Your manuscript has been evaluated with the help of two referees and their comments are enclosed. Please submit a revised manuscript and detail in your cover letter any changes that have been made. The reviewers suggest further mechanistic information to be included, which would certainly strengthen the manuscript. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Sincerely, Professor XXX ------------- Reviewer: 1 Recommendation: Publish after major revisions noted. Comments: The manuscript submitted by XXX described the use of …… complexes as…… reagents for the preparations of …… complexes. Overall, the manuscript was well-prepared. The procedure for the preparation of……complexes is simple enough. But the reaction time of 2 days seems limiting its practicability. There is a major doubt on the reaction described on Page 11. ……....... Additional Questions: Originality: Good Technical Quality: Good Clarity of Presentation: Good Importance to Field: Good Reviewer: 2 Recommendation: Publish after major revisions noted. Comments: This manuscript describes (i) ….. and (ii)……. The authors have published the use of …… as a preparative method for …. complexes in a previous communication and I think what is included here is incremental from their previous work. The use of ….. is a new element in their work, even though the reactivity is neither unexpected nor in my view is going to have wide applicability. The scope appears to be limited to ….. while ….. have not been studied. Based on the justification given above I consider the present manuscript unnecessarily long and more suitable for a note rather than article. The complexes reported are generally adequately characterised (there are some exceptions) however attempts to clarify mechanistic details are virtually nonexistent. In summary I recommend rejection of the manuscript in its current form and possible resubmission as a much shortened note. Additional Questions: Originality: Fair Technical Quality: Good Clarity of Presentation: Fair Importance to Field: Fair [ Last edited by seapass on 2012-1-27 at 16:01 ] |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
有时候真觉得大城市人没有县城人甚至个体户幸福
已经有3人回复
-
CSC & MSCA 博洛尼亚大学能源材料课题组博士/博士后招生｜MSCA经费充足、排名优
已经有5人回复
-
酰胺脱乙酰基
已经有8人回复
-
有70后还继续奋斗在职场上的吗？
已经有6人回复
-
博士延得我，科研能力直往上蹿
已经有7人回复
-
退学或坚持读
已经有27人回复
-
面上基金申报没有其他的参与者成吗
已经有5人回复
-
遇见不省心的家人很难过
已经有22人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- RSC和ACS的审稿意见结果什么的是共享的吗？？被拒后重投有什么经验？？
已经有10人回复
- 请帮忙翻译一下审稿意见，谢谢！
已经有1人回复
- 请有经验的虫友帮帮忙：应该怎样回复审稿人 在线等！！
已经有12人回复
- 帮忙看看这个审稿意见是什么意思
已经有4人回复
- 投稿有答复了，些许激动请大家帮忙看看，谢谢大家！（在13楼增加第二封审稿意见）
已经有32人回复
- 投了一篇文章，审稿结果是“major revision”，帮忙看看评审意见，有戏没？
已经有32人回复
- 【求助】麻烦帮忙看看我的审稿意见怎么回复啊，关于SEI膜
已经有13人回复
- 刚收到SCI期刊的审稿意见，看不懂，高手帮忙看一下~~
已经有8人回复
- 文章的审稿意见，大家帮忙看看！
已经有6人回复
- 请大家帮忙看看如何回复审稿意见
已经有4人回复
- 帮忙看看如何回复审稿人意见，急！！！
已经有5人回复
- 审稿意见回来。请教投过国际氢能源的虫友啊
已经有17人回复
yuezhonghui
木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 12 (小学生)
- 金币: 1877
- 散金: 3229
- 红花: 27
- 帖子: 2353
- 在线: 1810.8小时
- 虫号: 459100
- 注册: 2007-11-14
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 概率论与随机分析
2楼2011-11-05 21:58:59
seapass
至尊木虫 (职业作家)
超哥
- SEPI: 18
- 应助: 772 (博后)
- 贵宾: 3.074
- 金币: 16567.9
- 散金: 5496
- 红花: 82
- 沙发: 10
- 帖子: 3728
- 在线: 930.8小时
- 虫号: 441856
- 注册: 2007-10-27
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 海洋环境科学
3楼2011-11-05 22:19:14
yuezhonghui
木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 12 (小学生)
- 金币: 1877
- 散金: 3229
- 红花: 27
- 帖子: 2353
- 在线: 1810.8小时
- 虫号: 459100
- 注册: 2007-11-14
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 概率论与随机分析
4楼2011-11-05 23:17:27
seapass
至尊木虫 (职业作家)
超哥
- SEPI: 18
- 应助: 772 (博后)
- 贵宾: 3.074
- 金币: 16567.9
- 散金: 5496
- 红花: 82
- 沙发: 10
- 帖子: 3728
- 在线: 930.8小时
- 虫号: 441856
- 注册: 2007-10-27
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 海洋环境科学
5楼2011-11-05 23:31:16
chenhong_919
铜虫 (初入文坛)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 159
- 帖子: 40
- 在线: 56.2小时
- 虫号: 126093
- 注册: 2005-12-07
- 专业: 高分子组装与超分子结构
6楼2012-01-27 15:49:44