| 查看: 3178 | 回复: 26 | |||
| 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 | |||
[交流]
Applied Optics 大修后被拒,该如何是好，请各位虫友指教已有9人参与
|
|||
|
初审两个审稿人，一个同意发表，一个不同意，编辑给的大修，修改完编辑又返回给那个不同意发表的审稿人，一个月后被拒，意见如下： Dear Sir ***: Your revised manuscript does not suitably address the reviewers’ concerns, therefore I cannot accept your manuscript in its present form for publication in Applied Optics. If you wish to revise your manuscript to meet the reviewers’ objections (given below), you may choose to resubmit it to APPLIED OPTICS. The manuscript will, however, be regarded as a new manuscript and be given a new submission date. Thank you for submitting your manuscript to APPLIED OPTICS. We hope that we will be able to serve you in the future. Sincerely, **** ****, Topical Editor, APPLIED OPTICS ---------------------------- Reviewer comments provided here: Reviewer 1 After reading thru the authors responding letter, I was not convinced by the authors’ arguments. The major problem was focused on the linear Interpolation estimation of the unknowns that the authors proposed for wavefront estimation of large amount of shearing. It is true that for 2-D wavefront estimation, if wavefront resolution is based on the shear amount, the spatial resolution can be low for the large shears. And if you want to obtain a high spatial resolution estimation, you have to take more measurements. This is the price we should pay at present for high resolution estimation. Compare to the small shear (such as one pixel shear), wavefront estimation based on large shear (more than one pixel) with proposed method does have an advantage of high resolution in wavefront estimation as the small shear, except for linear interpolation approach for the wavefront unknowns, which is not acceptable. If the interpolation could be used for estimating the unknown values, why the authors do not use the linear interpolation of wavefront slope? At least it is more accurate and more reasonable than the linear interpolation of the unknown wavefront. It is also true that for the large shear the signal to noise ratio could be higher, but we are not clear how the authors would treat the 2pi(or one pi) phase ambiguity for the large shear scenario, which can be a big problem. For the finite difference based wavefront estimation, it is approximate method even if the authors think it is “ exactly accurate in principle”. It is generally not acceptable in the field of wavefront metrology if a method is principally incorrect even if the induced error is only 1-5% for some specific simulation examples. Of course, you can still use it as your own purpose, but it is not proper to publish to mislead the academia. 各位怎么看？重投还是改投？ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
你的学校职称晋升认CSCD吗？
已经有3人回复
-
请问大家，我有希望进浙大普博么
已经有8人回复
-
applied catalysis B 投稿模版
已经有5人回复
-
希望有师兄师姐帮忙引荐申博
已经有11人回复
-
毕业论文的数据能否再发小论文
已经有7人回复
-
东南大学电气学院电力电子方向招收硕士博士
已经有7人回复
-
开心！国庆前发个小财~
已经有15人回复
-
QB怎么还没消息
已经有57人回复
-
求推荐医学类杂志
已经有4人回复
-
25有机合成申博
已经有4人回复
21楼2012-12-13 10:35:49
3楼2012-12-12 10:49:55
hustoe2011
至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 178 (高中生)
- 金币: 22101.5
- 散金: 9962
- 红花: 47
- 帖子: 21980
- 在线: 4425.9小时
- 虫号: 1333598
- 注册: 2011-06-29
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 光学和光电子材料
4楼2012-12-12 13:14:17
5楼2012-12-12 13:33:46
5