24小时热门版块排行榜

>论坛更新日志 (4225)
>导师招生 (445)
>硕博家园 (266)
>虫友互识 (254)
>文献求助 (176)
>考博 (127)
>招聘信息布告栏 (103)
>博后之家 (50)
>休闲灌水 (38)
>论文投稿 (29)
>基金申请 (28)
>有机交流 (27)
>考研 (25)
>公派出国 (22)
>教师之家 (18)
>找工作 (17)

返回列表

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

wjl163

铜虫 (小有名气)

应助: 16 (小学生)
金币: 440.2
帖子: 144
在线: 264.9小时
虫号: 1333632

[交流] 有投过Journal of Testing and Evaluation的请进

小弟我去年9月底投的Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 论文方向是电子设备可靠性测试的，今年4月份杂志社过来审稿意见，是这样的

Your manuscript, referenced below, has been reviewed and found to be of potential interest:

"****************************"

Unfortunately, the manuscript is not acceptable in present form for publication in Journal of Testing and Evaluation. The reviewers have delineated several deficiencies and recommend major revisions which may render the work suitable for publication (see reviews below).

If you are willing and able to respond to each of the reviewer's critical comments, we would consider a revised manuscript. Feel free to go to the URL below to submit the revised manuscript, including figures. Please include an author response letter that addresses each point and indicates how the manuscript has been revised. Revised papers are due in the system within three weeks of this message.

下面还有两个审稿人的意见，这个期刊主要是要求审稿人在规定的几个方面进行评分，并给出修改意见的，主要如下
Reviewer #1 Evaluations:
Recommendation: Mandatory Revision
1. Is the title descriptive and concise?: O
2. Does the paper contribute to the permanent literature or to the immediate interests of the technical community?: O
3. Are all descriptions of commercial products, or their use, objective and not presented in an advertising manner?: O
4. Is the paper acceptable in literary form and structure, continuity of thought, and logical development?: M
5. The Substance of the paper shall not have been published unless the paper is clearly defined as a review paper. Does the paper meet this requirement?: A
6. Is the paper concise, yet thorough? If condensation is required, please specify exactly which material is extraneous.: M
7. Are the results properly correlated with pertinent work in the field, and has that work been referenced thoroughly?: M
8. Are the illustrations readable, relevant, and adequately explained? (An indication of scale is required in all photographs): M
9. Are the trend curves properly drawn to conform with the data?: M
10. Are the materials tested, the testing conditions, and the test results sufficiently described to permit other investigators to check the procedures and the conclusions?: A
11. Are the conclusions reasonable, succinct, and consistent with the data?: O
12. Do all references provide sufficient information to enable the reader to obtain copies?: A
Rating: Average

Reviewer #2 Evaluations:
Recommendation: Mandatory Revision
1. Is the title descriptive and concise?: A
2. Does the paper contribute to the permanent literature or to the immediate interests of the technical community?: A
3. Are all descriptions of commercial products, or their use, objective and not presented in an advertising manner?: M
4. Is the paper acceptable in literary form and structure, continuity of thought, and logical development?: M
5. The Substance of the paper shall not have been published unless the paper is clearly defined as a review paper. Does the paper meet this requirement?: A
6. Is the paper concise, yet thorough? If condensation is required, please specify exactly which material is extraneous.: A
7. Are the results properly correlated with pertinent work in the field, and has that work been referenced thoroughly?: A
8. Are the illustrations readable, relevant, and adequately explained? (An indication of scale is required in all photographs): A
9. Are the trend curves properly drawn to conform with the data?: A
10. Are the materials tested, the testing conditions, and the test results sufficiently described to permit other investigators to check the procedures and the conclusions?: A
11. Are the conclusions reasonable, succinct, and consistent with the data?: A
12. Do all references provide sufficient information to enable the reader to obtain copies?: N/A
Rating: Above Average

请各位投过此杂志或有一定经验的学术高手帮忙看看，修改后录用的可能性如何

回复此楼