| 查看: 4319 | 回复: 61 | |||||
[交流]
征集审稿意见啦~~（不怕没奖励，就怕不参与）
|
|||||
[ Last edited by zhtear99 on 2012-11-29 at 23:17 ] |
回复此楼» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐
 论文交流 | 投稿须知 |
» 本帖已获得的红花（最新10朵）
» 本帖@通知
» 猜你喜欢
化学工程321分求调剂
已经有12人回复
-
211本，11408一志愿中科院277分，曾在中科院自动化所实习
已经有4人回复
-
材料专硕326求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
东南大学364求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
国自科面上基金字体
已经有7人回复
-
药学383 求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
286求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
085601求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
302求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
考研化学学硕调剂，一志愿985
已经有5人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 请大家帮忙看下这个审稿意见怎么处理好
已经有22人回复
- 编辑给的审稿意见，怎么解答啊~~谢谢亲们~~
已经有6人回复
- 请教一下这样的审稿意见是什么意思？拜谢~
已经有3人回复
- 审稿意见回复，求助
已经有10人回复
- 【FESE】征集审稿人
已经有9人回复
- 关于optics communication 如何推荐审稿专家的问题
已经有4人回复
- [求助] sci论文revise, 其中一个拒稿的审稿人意见该如何回复？
已经有14人回复
- 审稿意见如何回复，求助
已经有4人回复
- 一审意见回来了，一个审稿人竭力推荐发表，另一个认为无新意...
已经有34人回复
- 编辑给的审稿意见怎么看都像少了一个人的，怎么办？
已经有5人回复
- 审稿意见回来了，要补做实验，但实验条件不够
已经有12人回复
- 审稿意见怎么回复
已经有3人回复
- 请教大家一个审稿意见问题~
已经有3人回复
- 会议论文同意接收后，怎么对待审稿意见？
已经有9人回复
- JPD的审稿意见在哪里啊？？急~~~~~
已经有14人回复
- 对审稿意见的回复
已经有11人回复
- 谁见过这样的审稿意见？
已经有34人回复
- 审稿意见，大家帮忙看看
已经有8人回复
- 外文审稿意见
已经有6人回复
- 审稿意见回答
已经有28人回复
- 审稿意见回复请教
已经有4人回复
» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:
-
电力全国重点实验室双一流A类长江学者团队招2026年全日制博士1名（4月3日截止）
+2/166
-
招收苏州国家实验室和苏州大学联合培养博士（2026年9月入学）
+1/82
-
厦门大学电池工况表征博士后招聘（固态电池 / 层状氧化物正极 / 原位-工况表征方向）
+1/78
-
博士后出站经验请教
+1/78
-
【武汉高校】【新能源材料与器件课题组】 招收优秀硕士调剂生！！！
+5/40
-
招硕士调剂生
+2/28
-
北京某研究院生物化学与分子生物学相关专业申请考核制博士招生（春季）
+1/15
-
西京学院土木水利 2026 级研究生招生相关说明
+1/8
-
食品科学与工程083200-297分
+1/8
-
博士后招聘（高薪40万+）
+1/7
-
课题组招收环境及相关专业调剂硕士研究生（欢迎优秀学生加入）
+1/7
-
国家蛋白质科学中心(北京)-哈尔滨工业大学联合培养招收博士
+1/7
-
双一流天津工业大学电信学院李鸿强教授招收2026年申请审核制博士3名
+1/5
-
【2026年春季补录】厦门大学田中群院士/易骏教授纳米光子学团队招收2026年入学博士生
+1/5
-
连发两篇 Nature！大样本单细胞测序解析认知、衰老与灵长类进化
+1/3
-
药学专硕一志愿苏大本科苏大寻求B区高校调剂名额
+1/2
-
层流压差式流量测控产品在环保与分析仪器领域的应用与优势
+1/2
-
339求调剂
+1/1
-
澳大利亚科学院院士Prof.Gordon Wallace, University of Wollongong 全奖博士机会
+1/1
-
澳洲维多利亚大学计算机类全额奖学金博士招生 （邮箱+微信可联系）
+1/1
11楼2012-11-29 19:21:32
★ ★ ★ ★ ★
zhtear99: 金币+5, 嘿嘿，第一个哦，非常感谢lcg2009版主。如若能完善些，再BB奖励哈~ 2012-11-29 20:01:56
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-11-30 11:45:40
zhtear99: 金币+5, 嘿嘿，第一个哦，非常感谢lcg2009版主。如若能完善些，再BB奖励哈~ 2012-11-29 20:01:56
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-11-30 11:45:40
|
1) It is better to add some new references, which can make reviewer to know the recent research and the innovations. 2) the innovations should be described clearly. 3) The English should be polished by a native English speaking person. 发一个给大家参考，献丑了 |
18楼2012-11-29 19:46:33
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
zhtear99: 金币+7, 感谢提供审稿意见~ 看来你文章写的还不错，审稿人只是建议小修一下，呵呵~ 2012-11-29 23:11:01
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-11-30 11:45:49
zhtear99: 金币+7, 感谢提供审稿意见~ 看来你文章写的还不错，审稿人只是建议小修一下，呵呵~ 2012-11-29 23:11:01
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-11-30 11:45:49
|
The authors complemented their manuscript and provided an adequate justification of the results obtained in the paper in response to the reviewer comments. I believe the revised version can be accepted for publication after the following minor revisions: 1. A clear presentation of the novelty of the paper in the introduction, especially in relation to references 33 and 34. 2. Determination of the amount (%) of D-units in the PLA chain. The D- and L-content are fundamental for the crystallization behavior of PLA and absolutely necessary in a publication like the present one.  |
27楼2012-11-29 22:13:35
45楼2012-11-30 16:47:35
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-12-01 10:42:25
zhtear99: 金币+10, 感谢顾问童鞋提供的审稿意见，非常完整，还有自己的评价，很棒~ 2012-12-01 13:01:29
zhtear99: 金币+10, 两份审稿意见，所以双份奖励~ 2012-12-01 13:02:08
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-12-01 10:42:25
zhtear99: 金币+10, 感谢顾问童鞋提供的审稿意见，非常完整，还有自己的评价，很棒~ 2012-12-01 13:01:29
zhtear99: 金币+10, 两份审稿意见，所以双份奖励~ 2012-12-01 13:02:08
|
研究方向：MEMS（microelectro-mechanical systems） 审稿意见：如下所列 个人感想：第二个reviewer看似有点为难我们，提了很多比较刁难人的问题，但是真的很有帮助，尤其是对于如何在已经有了好的idea的情况下，怎么事半功倍证明这个idea漂亮。后来我们回复之后，这个reviewer还又来了一个问题，所以还有第二次答复。最终reviewer可能比较满意吧，给我们文章打分比较高，最后被收到了杂志的年度highlight里面（显摆一下，只有3%的文章被收录了  ）Referee report First referee's report The concept is very interesting. The manuscript is very well written. The conclusions are supported by experimental data. Of course a good job! Second referee's report This work presents a new exciting idea to develop a XXX which has good potential. Authors have however failed to demonstrate clearly the benefits of their device. In Figure 7 the slope of the straight heated and XXX heated curve look very similar except for probably initial 2-3 secs. The two cooling mechanisms look to saturate at two different temperatures. It means that the thermal resistances of the two systems are different and are hence not completely comparable. The absolute difference in final temperature is of little consequence as a different heat-sink for the straight cooled device can reach the similar final temperature with a similar time delay. The benefit of the presented device is that it will allow any MEMS device to reach its final operating temperature quickly with minimal energy loss and then maintain the operating temperature. So it is recommended that the authors comment of the initial slope of the two curves (or compare the energy lost in reaching the final state) and compare their device with respect to the straight cooled device. Authors can also consider devicing an experiment in which both the systems reach the similar final temperature and demonstrate the benefit of the XXX. Authors are also recommended to discuss the temperature jump in initial 2-3 seconds for the no heatsink and the XXX case. The authors have presented a very good overview of the existing technology. The applicability of this technology, however, depends on availability of different XXXX. Authors are recommended to present a few exemplary XXXX’s to show that this technology can be tuned for different applications requiring different turn on temperatures. The authors are requested to present a labeled cross section schematic of the displacement experiment i.e. figure 2 a. 5 mm droplet is sometimes too large for many MEMS applications. Also to achieve a better local thermal control the authors would like to design the heating array with as small a droplet as possible. Therefore the authors are recommended to discuss the effect of droplet miniaturization on the maximum displacement that can be achieved reversibly while considering the increasing effect of surface tension. The device schematic as shown has XXXX domes trapped in holes on copper plate. It is stated that the XXXX wets copper in its molten state. Then during operation of the device when the XXXX is in liquid phase how do the authors prevent the droplets to spread and wet the whole copper surface? Even if the wetting is slow, it will affect the long term operation of the device. |
50楼2012-12-01 10:18:11
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
zhtear99: 金币+18, 感谢你和大家分享这些，很受教也很有指导意义~ 2012-12-01 13:03:44
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-12-01 13:04:02
zhtear99: 金币+18, 感谢你和大家分享这些，很受教也很有指导意义~ 2012-12-01 13:03:44
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-12-01 13:04:02
|
投稿和审稿的一些片段想法 1. 当一篇文章被退稿的时候，审稿人提了一堆意见，叫补这个实验那个实验。可以说，有水平的投稿人就象高中老师一样，能够“猜题”，知道什么东西“在考纲范围之内”，什么东西不需要，预先把审稿人要做的实验做好，加到文章里去。可以说，很多文章都处在临界点上，正好缺这些数据就是打不中，而就是加这点数据正好“及格”了！知道这些道理后，一个有用的方法是请实验室其他真正能够直言的、有经验的同仁提尖锐意见。导师在这里也起到很重要作用。 2. 投稿的奥妙，用田忌赛马的语言来说，就是：如果用下等马去和别人的上等马去较量，必然打不过人家。曾经一个学术大师告诉我，经验规则是投稿者自己判断文章的水平，要使自己的文章比目标杂志平均水平高一点才能确保命中率。而“投稿者自己判断文章的水平”是一门学问，有的人就是能够预测未来，知道自己文章的命运。为什么文章命中那么重要呢？有个单词叫credibility，意思是说如果自己都不知道自己的文章应该投什么杂志，投文章老是退稿，那么编辑又怎么能把投稿者当一回事呢？对别人的工作要客观，对自己的工作要客观。很多指导写作的理论书都说，写文章的时候，作者必须“往后退几步”，冷静地判断自己科研工作的意义和价值，而不能产生“晕轮效应”。 3. 大学里，前十几名同学都可以拿A，有的同学不用考试就知道他稳拿第一名了，他却还开夜车，搞得周围的人很紧张。在撰写科研论文的时候也是这样，如果你的目标杂志只是普通杂志，并且你文章的内容远远超过“及格”标准了，那么就是要走“保守主义”路线，也就是说要避免奇谈怪论，避免oversell和controversial的东西。审稿人的审美观是不一样的。如果你炒作概念，运气好也许能中Nature。但是如果你已经确保能中普通杂志却还是炒作概念，那也许连普通杂志都中不了！ 4. 学术论文不是新闻报道。很多两页快报放两张电子显微镜照片，说合成出吸引眼球的纳米材料，效果其好无比。但是为什么效果其好无比呢？文章里没有说，而是说“后续研究正在进行中”，结果过了几年，没有看到什么“后续报道”。这样的文章，随着时间的推移，越来越难被好杂志的审稿人接受了。 5. 追求的是实实在在的东西。在乎的不是“PNAS, to be submitted”，而是“Catalysis Letters, published”。雷声大、雨点小就好比台湾政客，选举的时候空头支票开了很多，当选后没有一件事情办成的。必须要有真抓实干的精神，饭要一口一口吃，事情要一件一件做，文章要一篇一篇发。 |
51楼2012-12-01 10:54:15
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-12-05 19:48:11
|
研究方向：计算机辅助药物设计 投稿杂志名称：International Journal of Molecular Sciences 审稿意见： Reviewer 1# 1) This paper is well organized and of interest in the field, but some points must be clarified and discussed before it can be suitable of publication. 2) On page 3, line 113: "required empirical potential energy function" must be substituted with "force field parameters" since the term is wrong. A question on page 4 paragraph lines 118-121: How can the authors be sure that the most conformational analysis been made on each of these tow compounds? This point of course is crucial for a correct alignment and thus further analysis. 3) On page 7, another perplexity: How can the authors be sure that the crystallized water are indeed structural for the template protein too? Are there any experimental evidence? I suggest to repeat the docking calculations also in absence of water inside the cleft and tentatively compare the results obtained. This point of is crucial since all the discussion about the molecular interactions is linked to structural water playing a fundamental role in stabilization. 4) On page 11, figure 5: line 322-323: "tubes" instead of "ball and stick". Reviewer 1# Considering the situation that no X-ray structure of human proteasome exists, making good models of the enzyme as inhibitor-bound form help researchers conduct SAR study efficiently. The computational studies in this manuscript almost meet the demand. However, both compounds dealt with in this manuscript are covalent inhibitors. The reviewer would like the authors to state any good reason why only non-covalent interactions were considered in the calculations. Especially, TBA is believed to make reversible borate adduct form to display proteasome-inhibitory activity, and the bound structure should be more suitable to evaluate results from SAR studies on the compounds of this class. Recalculations is requested if needed. On the top of that, the following should be considered. Line 68: What abbreviation MM means (multiple myeloma) should be indicated. Line 101: "selected considered having a similar range" is grammatically incorrect. Line 227: change energy to energetically throuout: Usually, "big" is not used scientific articles like this. Change to large, bulky or other appropriate words. 个人感想：两个审稿人给的意见都很好。两位审稿人比我还细心，我没检查出来的明显错误被他们看出来了（囧ing），而且第二个审稿人对我们做的proteasome很了解。讲一下当时投稿发生的小插曲吧。这家杂志是让投稿人自己推荐审稿人的。师姐说一般都在谷歌学术里搜一下，找几个QSAR方面的大牛就可以了。原因有二：一是大牛很厉害，可以提供很好很专业的审稿意见；二是大牛不会为难咱们这些小虾米。然后，我就这么着，找了俩大牛当审稿人。当时带我做实验的老师知道后，很光火，狠狠地训了我一顿。因为他跟这家杂志的几个审稿人很熟，如果我推荐他认识的那几个人当审稿人会比较保险。投完文章后，我惴惴不安，担心被拒，也觉得自己太自以为是了，没有事先问老师。最后，文章收到了revise。事实证明，师姐的话也是有道理的。所以说推荐审稿人的两种方式其实应该都可行的。 PS：IJMS是收费杂志，IF是2点几吧。我估摸着可能是收费的原因，所以接受率比较高吧。 [ Last edited by zhtear99 on 2012-12-1 at 14:50 ] |
52楼2012-12-01 14:41:40
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
zhtear99: 金币+15, 感谢来稿~~~ 2012-12-02 12:37:16
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-12-02 12:37:18
zhtear99: 金币+15, 感谢来稿~~~ 2012-12-02 12:37:16
zhtear99: 回帖置顶 2012-12-02 12:37:18
|
去年投稿的审稿意见： Reviewer A: Comments for Reviewer's Assessment: The quality of English writing is very poor and the document must be revised by an native english speaking person. See my remarks in the enclosed file. Comments for the Authors: Interesting paper with a good patent review. The document requires major modifications and answers to my remarks as proposed in the enclosed file. Reviewer B: Comments for Reviewer's Assessment: The authors review approaches for addressing naphthenic acid corrosion, including usage of inhibitors, solvent extraction, chemical conversion, thermal treatment, and hydrotreatment. The review covers an important topic that will be of interest to the journals' readership and focuses upon patents between 2000 and 2011. Whilst the manuscript provides a summary of the methods employed, it does not provide much detail, making it harder for the reader to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of each. The reviewer would recommend providing some additional description to strengthen the manuscript. |
53楼2012-12-02 11:38:32
2楼2012-11-29 16:42:12
3楼2012-11-29 16:47:48
4楼2012-11-29 16:55:23
5楼2012-11-29 18:57:58
6楼2012-11-29 19:01:55
7楼2012-11-29 19:02:29
8楼2012-11-29 19:04:37
我表示没有看懂啊。。。。 10楼2012-11-29 19:18:18
刚读研，还没有过，这个。。。中文的算吗 12楼2012-11-29 19:24:02
★
送鲜花一朵
zhtear99: 金币+1, 嘿嘿，古妞先来一篇吧~ 2012-11-29 19:32:04
送鲜花一朵zhtear99: 金币+1, 嘿嘿，古妞先来一篇吧~ 2012-11-29 19:32:04
|
有看过的，挪用不 [ Last edited by 古可ぷ on 2012-11-29 at 19:55 ] |
13楼2012-11-29 19:24:14
14楼2012-11-29 19:24:37
16楼2012-11-29 19:29:24
17楼2012-11-29 19:36:50
19楼2012-11-29 19:56:57
20楼2012-11-29 19:57:49
21楼2012-11-29 19:59:39
23楼2012-11-29 21:12:43
26楼2012-11-29 22:01:07
28楼2012-11-29 22:16:04
29楼2012-11-29 22:43:42
30楼2012-11-29 23:52:02
31楼2012-11-30 08:15:31
36楼2012-11-30 08:54:56
37楼2012-11-30 08:59:46
38楼2012-11-30 09:11:51
39楼2012-11-30 09:26:59
40楼2012-11-30 09:30:58
42楼2012-11-30 10:10:22
43楼2012-11-30 15:36:14
44楼2012-11-30 15:44:26
46楼2012-11-30 21:35:40
49楼2012-11-30 23:07:17
简单回复
2012-11-29 19:16
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 欢迎来稿~~~ 2012-11-29 19:19:49
支持下
zenglin199215楼
2012-11-29 19:27
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 谢谢哈，欢迎参加本次活动~ 2012-11-29 19:32:22
祝福祝福
xunmeng198522楼
2012-11-29 21:02
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 谢谢~希望你可以参与到活动中来~ 2012-11-29 21:06:02
zyl1265024楼
2012-11-29 21:22
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 欢迎来稿哈~ 2012-11-29 23:12:16
seaskyzdw25楼
2012-11-29 21:40
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 希望你也能参与这个活动~ 2012-11-29 23:12:44
随风101032楼
2012-11-30 08:22
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 鼓励参与活动哈~ 2012-11-30 11:42:23
shhw200833楼
2012-11-30 08:24
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 感谢关注，若能参与更好~ 2012-11-30 11:42:37
army88888834楼
2012-11-30 08:27
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 欢迎参与活动哈~ 2012-11-30 11:43:32
likai113935楼
2012-11-30 08:36
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 欢迎来稿哈~ 2012-11-30 11:43:48
emuch41楼
2012-11-30 10:08
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 感谢羊老大的关注，期待参与啊，呵呵~ 2012-11-30 11:44:28
appleboy47楼
2012-11-30 22:06
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 欢迎来稿~~~ 2012-11-30 23:05:28
su-b0848楼
2012-11-30 22:35
回复
zhtear99: 金币+1, 感谢关注，欢迎参与活动~ 2012-11-30 23:05:44
