| 查看: 2915 | 回复: 18 | |||
| 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 | |||
zhzimi_2007木虫 (职业作家)
|
[求助]
投稿European Journal of Operational Research求助！
|
||
|
有投过European Journal of Operational Research的虫友吗？向您请教一个问题？ 我11年初向European Journal of Operational Research投了一篇稿子，11年末编辑回信拒了，回信如下： I am enclosing below the referees' comments on your paper, which has received very serious consideration. The paper is presently unacceptable because of deficiencies listed in the reports, although the idea is interesting. As there is some potential for a good paper, we encourage you to continue your research in this direction and to resubmit a re-written paper to the EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH when it will be ready. From my experience, a new submission which has a fair chance to be finally accepted, needs a considerable amount of work and time. So please do not mistake this decision to be of the type "major revision and re-evaluation". At this stage, it is a rejection, to my regret. In addition, I would suggest you provide a detailed response to the referee's remarks (only in this respect, the procedure is similar to the "major revision" case). This would speed up the procedure next time. 经过修改后于12年初重投给该杂志，最近编辑回信又拒了，回信如下： I am enclosing below the referees' comments on your paper, which has received very serious consideration. The paper is presently unacceptable because of deficiencies listed in the reports, although the idea is interesting. As there is some potential for a good paper, we encourage you to continue your research in this direction and to resubmit a re-written paper to the EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH when it will be ready. From my experience, a new submission which has a fair chance to be finally accepted, needs a considerable amount of work and time. So please do not mistake this decision to be of the type "major revision and re-evaluation". At this stage, it is a rejection, to my regret. In addition, I would suggest you provide a detailed response to the referee's remarks (only in this respect, the procedure is similar to the "major revision" case). This would speed up the procedure next time. 通过审稿意见可以看出审稿人还是原先的两个审稿人，两个人都要求修改。 我想请教一下有过European Journal of Operational Research投稿经验的朋友，上面的两次回信一模一样，是不是都是European Journal of Operational Research编辑们拒稿的模版啊。编辑其实只是客套一下，事实上并不喜欢你的文章，并不准备接受你的文章。如果是这种情况的话，我就不再重投这个杂志了。 还是编辑就是这样，拒了让你修改重投，再拒了再让你修改重投，直至接收，中间没有大修或小修这种状态。如果是这种情况的话，那我就继续修改再重投这个杂志了。 [ Last edited by seapass on 2012-4-14 at 14:16 ] |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
材料求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
354求调剂
已经有9人回复
-
化学工程321分求调剂
已经有22人回复
-
考研调剂
已经有3人回复
-
326求调剂
已经有8人回复
-
333求调剂
已经有7人回复
-
一志愿东华大学控制学硕320求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
考研化学学硕调剂，一志愿985
已经有7人回复
-
0703化学调剂
已经有15人回复
-
0703化学调剂 ，六级已过，有科研经历
已经有14人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- chemistry a european journal投稿求助
已经有3人回复
- 投稿European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry时间太长，什么原因？
已经有6人回复
- european polymer journal 投稿求助
已经有2人回复
- European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 投稿求助
已经有6人回复
- 有没有第一次投稿european polymer journal的各种文件的模板及要求啊
已经有6人回复
- European Journal of Inorganic Chemistry 投稿状态
已经有7人回复
- European Heart Journal 投稿请教
已经有1人回复
- chenmistry a european journal 投稿状态
已经有18人回复
- European Polymer Journal 投稿word模板（主要是投稿格式）
已经有13人回复
- 投稿European Polymer Journal 一个月了，状态还是with editor，正常吗？
已经有5人回复
- 投稿European Polymer Journal 近一个月了，状态还是with editor，正常吗？
已经有3人回复
- Central European Journal of Physics 投稿求助
已经有7人回复
- 投稿European Journal of Operational Research求助！
已经有12人回复
- European Journal of Inorganic Chemistry 投稿求助
已经有1人回复
- EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY投稿
已经有0人回复
- 投稿EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORGANIC CHEMISTRY 的一点疑问
已经有8人回复
- Central European Journal of Chemistry 投稿求助
已经有3人回复
- European Polymer Journal投稿状态
已经有1人回复
- 求助投稿European Polymer Journal
已经有8人回复
- European Polymer Journal投稿求助
已经有3人回复
- European polymer journal 投稿状态
已经有3人回复
zhzimi_2007
木虫 (职业作家)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 1759.3
- 散金: 50
- 帖子: 3631
- 在线: 703.6小时
- 虫号: 450803
- 注册: 2007-11-04
- 专业: 应用数学方法
|
我把最近的审稿意见发给您，您帮我看看： Reviewer Comments: Reviewer #1: In my side of view this paper has some originality regarding to its application. Even, the author tries to mix different theories with each others, finally it give a bright-full results. However, I think there are lots of area that should be corrected and I think it was because of different amendments which were added to this paper after its first review. 1- The introduction is completely vast however it becomes to complicated while it just speak about history of the methods in details but it doesn't go through their application and definitions in general during introduction of the paper. I recommend author to re-structured the introduction and make it more readable for scholars. 2- It is a necessary to add a graphical chart at the end of introduction to avoid complication among history. the graphical chart should show the different areas that author mentioned about them and then it should illustrate the interactions and finally the contribution of this paper should be stared in the figure. It help to show the area of knowledge that author was explored in his study. 3- the contribution of this paper should be more highlighted at the end of introduction. 4- some small English errors should be corrected such as page one, line 48, in the middle, it should be "in recent years,..." 5- the structure of paper does not obey the standard form of normal academic papers, maybe some definitions should come under methodology, and results and discussions should be more highlighted rather than lots of complicated Remarks. 6- Since the strength of this paper is more in its application, it needs to be more strong on this issue. The examples should be more applied and even some example could be comparative example which shows any differences between this method and previous ones. 7- In page 3, Line 30, It is not suitable for academic paper to use "we"! 8- The procedure of this method should be illustrated by aid of graphical chart. 9- Conclusion should be more precise. 10- Using lots of references even at the end of the paper in remarks and results is not common and suitable at all. maybe they can be introduced as a significance of study in the introduction and at the end, the contributions should be mentioned alone. 11- Technically I like this mathematical solution in decision making. However, it will be so complicated for some scholars! Reviewer #2: The paper must be completely restructured. Indeed, in its current form, the author presents: - A set of definitions, remarks, examples, but without given textual explanations before giving the mathematical formulation. - There are no apparent links between the different definitions, sections, etc. etc. It should be important to: - Explain with few words or in few lines, what is the contribution of the each definition. - Propose the definitions with explanations, positioning, and links with what follow. - Highlight the most important definitions to highlight the contribution of the author proportion. On page 11, page where the author presents the proposal, we find a set of definitions, remarks and examples. At page 11: It would be interesting that the author present the examples discussed by (Feng et al. 2010a) (Jiang et al. 2010a), and position its results regarding the obtained results by these authors. The goal is to have some elements of comparison. Page 20: At the end of section 3 (proposed approach) there is no balance and the relationship between sections 3 and 4 (the author deal with 'Weighted interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets based decision making', again without link, explanations .). We must wait the page 25 for having explanations: the author explains the benefits of its proposition, but as he does not position this proposition regarding other examples (examples discussed in (Feng et al. 2010a) (Jiang et al. 2010a)) ? The interest is not highlighted. At the end of page 25, the explanations are presented without giving links with the different definitions, remarks, examples (presented at the beginning of the paper) ? the benefit of the proposed approach is less visible. It is also the case for 'Weighted interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets based decision making' section. Moreover, the author does not position its proposition, without links . A discussion on the types of problems that can be used with the proposed approach is important. What about the following works: (Wang et al., 2009), (Zhang, 2011) regarding the proposed paper: Zhoujing Wang, Kevin W. Li, Weize Wang, 2009, An approach to multiattribute decision making with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy assessments and incomplete weights. Information Sciences 179, 3026-3040. Zhiming Zhang, 2011, A rough set approach to intuitionistic fuzzy soft set based decision making. Applied Mathematical Modelling. |
8楼2012-04-11 09:51:52
啸天犬
至尊木虫 (职业作家)
- 应助: 2171 (讲师)
- 金币: 9715.1
- 红花: 45
- 帖子: 3962
- 在线: 302.2小时
- 虫号: 1362468
- 注册: 2011-08-07
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 水文地质学(含地热地质学)
2楼2012-04-11 09:36:59
seapass
至尊木虫 (职业作家)
超哥
- SEPI: 18
- 应助: 772 (博后)
- 贵宾: 3.074
- 金币: 16568.4
- 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2012-04-11 09:38:00
zhzimi_2007
木虫 (职业作家)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 1759.3
- 散金: 50
- 帖子: 3631
- 在线: 703.6小时
- 虫号: 450803
- 注册: 2007-11-04
- 专业: 应用数学方法
4楼2012-04-11 09:40:52
