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

fswang

铁杆木虫 (著名写手)

应助: 25 (小学生)
金币: 7277.7
散金: 274
红花: 8
帖子: 1628
在线: 708.1小时
虫号: 542517
注册: 2008-04-09
专业: 计算机应用技术

[求助] 审稿意见看不懂，专家英文不地道

昨天收到了某SCI期刊的审稿意见，三个审稿人，两个同意接受，一个大修，主编给了小修，但是第一个审稿人的意见着实看不懂，可能是他的英文也不好，麻烦大家帮忙给解读。不懂的地方实在是太多了。谢谢大家！！！

//////////////////////////////
(1) It is a rather theoretical result, so possible it should fit better to a less application oriented journal.
Or take more space to explain the specific application you are aiming at.
这一条能明白。
(2) Improve your structure
- Your related research is part of the introduction 不懂！
- Organisation of the paper
(3) You refer to the difference with "real world" problems; can you clarify this difference. 不懂！
- Fig 1. is not informative
- I don't like the name "Ours" to refer to your algorithm, can you give it a name
- The algorithms you compared to from fig 2, are they implemented by you or open toolboxes?
I can not find what is the case. I found it always weak, when the algorithms are implemented by yourselves. 不懂！
(4) Your conclusions are mainly a summary, the conclusion that your solution is outperforming, is possibly a little bit positive. 不懂
(5) What about computing power? Does your solution solve everything, I don't think so, so what are the weaknesses of your solution?

回复此楼

1楼 2012-12-02 09:58:09

已阅回复此楼关注TA 给TA发消息送TA红花 TA的回帖

googleuboy

木虫 (知名作家)

应助: 747 (博后)
金币: 3118.8
散金: 4149
红花: 36
帖子: 6906
在线: 760.6小时
虫号: 1810740
注册: 2012-05-11
性别: GG
专业: 结构工程

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
秋天白云: 金币+1, 感谢交流~！ 2012-12-02 10:18:45
fswang: 金币+5, ★★★很有帮助, 非常感谢您详细的解读。 2012-12-02 11:44:14
esub: 金币+1, 鼓励有价值的回帖 2012-12-29 18:38:57

(2) Improve your structure
- Your related research is part of the introduction 不懂！
让你把introduction部分扩充一下，加入自己之前的相关的研究，例如你以前发的paper啥的。
(3) You refer to the difference with "real world" problems; can you clarify this difference. 不懂！
你的文章谈到了与"real world" problems不同的地方，让你指明这些不同点，而不是用“difference”这种指代性的，模糊性的概念。A就是A，B就是B。就如论文中你用了， A,B,C,D, etc。那么请说明“etc”这个等等所指代的具体内容

I can not find what is the case. I found it always weak, when the algorithms are implemented by yourselves. 不懂！
貌似他不太同意你的观点。。。

(4) Your conclusions are mainly a summary, the conclusion that your solution is outperforming, is possibly a little bit positive. 不懂
可能是认为在你的结论中，你有点夸大了你的算法的精确性啥的。