24小时热门版块排行榜

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

wxldreamfly

银虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 717.2
帖子: 50
在线: 122.8小时
虫号: 1323144

[交流] JOSA B这样的状态和审稿意见，有戏吗？第一次搞SCI，心里没底啊！

审稿状态：Your manuscript is in rereview. Rereview status:
Rereviewer Request Status Rereview Status

Rereviewer 1 Waiting , Due(06/20/2012)

On 06/13/2012 the final decision was made on your manuscript with a result of Repeat Review.
Revisions were submitted on 06/11/2012.
Preproduction review for your manuscript was completed on 05/29/2012.
On 05/25/2012 the first decision was made on your manuscript with a result of Manuscript Requires Major Revisions.
Peer review for your manuscript was completed on 05/25/2012.
An editor was assigned to your manuscript on 05/19/2012.
Quality check for your manuscript was completed on 05/18/2012.
Your manuscript was submitted on 05/17/2012.

审稿意见很简单，主要是让引两篇文献
Reviewer 1
Waveguides formed by hyperbolic media (which the authors refer to as "indefinite"

has
been studied in great detail over the last decade. Among many relevant papers one
must mention

V. A. Podolskiy and E. E. Narimanov, Strongly anisotropic waveguide as a nonmagnetic left-handed system, Phys. Rev. B 71, 201101(R) (2005).

which demonstrated negative index for ion-plane propagation, and

L. Alekseyev and E. E. Narimanov, Slow light and 3D imaging with non-magnetic negative index systems, Optics Express 14, 11184 (2006).

which presented a detailed study of the propagating modes in such structures.

Inconceivably, the authors don't even mention this work, let alone presenting a clear explanation of whether (and how) their results go beyond those 6 years old results. Not until they do this, they manuscript can be considered for publication, in JOSA or elsewhere.

大家帮忙看下，有戏吗？

回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

多组分精馏求助已经有3人回复
青椒八年已不青，大家都被折磨成啥样了？已经有12人回复
交叉科学部支持青年基金，对三无青椒是个机会吗？已经有6人回复
免疫学博士有名额，速联系已经有4人回复
国家基金申请书模板内插入图片不可调整大小? 已经有6人回复
国家级人才课题组招收2026年入学博士已经有5人回复
Fe3O4@SiO2合成已经有6人回复
青年基金C终止已经有4人回复
26申博求博导推荐-遥感图像处理方向已经有4人回复
西南交通大学国家级人才团队2026年博士研究生招生（考核制）—机械、材料、力学方向已经有3人回复

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:

最近老师给投了SURFACE & COATINGS TECHNOLOGY，心里很是没有底，不知道是SCI几区已经有14人回复
sci 被拒后，大修改后重投这个杂志有戏吗？已经有35人回复
SCI审稿意见回来了，编辑给的moderate revision，麻烦大家帮分析一下，有BB 已经有28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
被一个审稿人提了9条意见，还有戏吗？已经有40人回复
SCI投稿审稿人意见是这样的怎么回复？已经有9人回复
SCI文章审稿人意见回来，却不知如何答复，请各位前辈指点已经有7人回复
第一次投sci的审稿意见，小虫请教～已经有14人回复

» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:

查看全部散金贴

1楼 2012-06-15 09:22:23

已阅回复此楼关注TA 给TA发消息送TA红花 TA的回帖

zhang86

木虫 (小有名气)

应助: 37 (小学生)
金币: 3152.9
帖子: 218
在线: 117.3小时
虫号: 1354456

★
wxldreamfly(金币+1): 谢谢参与

审稿人的意见很明确，就是要让楼主引用上述两篇文献，而且更重要的是说清楚你的文章比这两篇6年前的文献的研究内容的优越之处，也就是创新点。如果你不能明确的说明上述原因，审稿人认为你的文章是无法发表的。
楼主需要认真、严谨的对待上述两篇文献，下功夫认真分析清楚自己相对它们的创新点。如果能清晰、充分的说明上述原因，则文章一定能被接收。否则，可能就会悲剧了~
我个人觉得希望还是很大的，楼主加油，祝愿早日修成正果~
Good luck for you！