24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 2754  |  回复: 34

huomingying

银虫 (正式写手)

[求助] 求鉴定是大修还是小修,还有中的可能!

小弟我之前中了几篇国内的EI,这是小弟第一次尝试投SCI。去年10月初投的,一直审到今年3月。第一个评审专家就是让加一段解释,两个简单的语法修改,基本算小修吧。第二个专家很认真,把我将近40个公式从头到尾推了一边,其中我确实有一些敲写错误都给我指出了;还把我参考文献下载看了一下,说参考文献应该是“original source of a work”,有两个参考文献写错了;另外也让我在文中加一些解释;修改意见写了很多很详细,但是基本是以上3类,没有对研究问题、方法和结果提出异议。大家说说这样是大修还是小修呢?这次还需要评审那么长时间么?我本想要中一篇SCI,这学期博士开题能够顺利点,不知道计划能不能达成。以下是修改意见(确实有点多):


Reviewer #1: 5. Numerical Simulations;
It would be better if you can explain the physical meanings of the optimization result more.
The optimized state/control histories in Fig.7 is very interesting. Readers would like to question why these histories are physically optimal. For example the orbital radius first increases from 1 to 1.05 for about 50 days then decreases to 0.8. Why wouldn't it monotonically decrease from 1 to 0.8? For other example, the zenithal angle first decreases slowly but after 150th day, it rapidly decreases to 80 deg.
Why wouldn't it keep the same change rate?
Although these histories are NLP result, the physical meaning of these behaviors are not trivial.
For the completeness of this paper, I recommend that you add explanation for them.
Abstract: the solutions of general mode and geostationary mode <of> electric sail
1. Introduction 1st paragraph: analysis the stability -> analyzed the stability
2. Dynamical Equation: It would be better if the angle alpha and beta are defined(cone and clock) in this section not in the following section.


Reviewer #2: The paper investigates displaced orbits using an electric sail. This is an interesting topic and some results are shown. However, there are several parts of this paper that are not clear to evaluate further, so I have the following comments for major revision.
General:
- This paper does not have enough fundamental explanations. Please specify the following points
1) The reason why authors selected the inertial spherical referenced frame for electric sail.
2) The reason why the transition trajectory is optimized to minimize transfer time. What does 'orbital transfer capability of electric sail' mean?
- There are some typographical errors or mathematical mistakes. Please check all equations. If there exits some mathematical mistake, the results become unreliable.
- References must be original source of a work. In addition please check if all cite numbers are correct.

Specific:
Nomenclature:
-'a_+' and subscripts '+' are confusing.
1. Introduction:
- p.2 line 6. '100kg propellant mass'. Is this not propellant mass but total spacecraft mass?
- P.2 line 10 after Fig. 1. 'The results show that the thrust force of the solar sail decays as (1/r)^2, and that of the electric sail decays as (1/r)^(7/6)'. Mengali [12] also refer Janhunen [9]. Therefore this sentence is confusing.
2. Dynamical Equations
- Eq.(2). K=cos_theta i '+' sin_theta j. Is this equation correct? If this is correct, Eq.(3) and (5) are wrong. Or K=cos_theta i '-' sin_theta j ?
- Eq.(5). 'phi'sin_theta i. typographical error. 'phi_dot'sin_theta i
- Eq.(9). There exists mathematical mistake. The third term about vector k, not '2(r_dot)(phi_dot)cos_theta', but '2r(phi_dot)(theta_dot)cos_theta'. Also, Eq. (13) has mistake.
- p.2 line 1 before Eq. (11). Is the reference [13] correct?
- Eq. (11). Please explain from what the coefficient k(kappa) is given. Is this variable value through a mission? Or specify reference about the coefficient.
3. Displaced Electric Sail Orbits
- Please check the subscripts about acceleration. 'a_+' and 'a_+d' are confusing. Eq. (11) and (12) use 'a_+', but Eq. (16) use 'a_+d'. Is this 'a_+'?  Is 'a_+' of Eq.(11) acceleration of the sail on Earth's orbit? On the other hand, what does 'a_+d' of Eq.(19) and (23) mean? Is this required acceleration on Earth's orbit or displaced orbit? Is this equal to magnitude of 'a_s'?
5. Numerical Simulations
- p.6 line 10 after '5. Numerical Simulations'. This is not principle discussion. Therefore it cannot be mentioned that 'So that the electric sail is more competent than solar sail in the application of displaced orbit.' What does 'existing technology' mean? Acceleration of a solar sail is determined by total spacecraft mass and sail area mainly. I recommend comparison of, for example, payload mass fraction because that of electric sail is shown.
- Fig. 7. History of |a_s| in Eq. (11) should be shown.
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
回帖支持 ( 显示支持度最高的前 50 名 )

huomingying

银虫 (正式写手)

补充一下,目前我已经修改完了,修改说明就写了6页,针对每一个问题都进行了修改,已经提交回去了。
原来“major revision”就是大修啊,我才知道,看来这篇文章确实“大修”了,我只能耐心等待了,开题前估计没戏了!
2楼2013-05-03 13:28:20
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
普通回帖

yoyopku

木虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
huomingying: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2013-05-03 13:52:52
第二个审稿人不是明确说了建议来个大修的么?~~
再说大修和小修都一样,都得改的审稿人满意,不知道给了多长时间。
3楼2013-05-03 13:41:06
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

huomingying

银虫 (正式写手)

有没有人有经验,帮我看看,如果我根据修改意见(都是小改动)仔细修改了每一处,最后中的可能有多大。我是航空宇航学科的,中一篇SCI感觉还不是太容易。
4楼2013-05-03 13:42:45
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

yuxinnick

木虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
huomingying: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2013-05-03 13:53:00
大修小修主要是看主编的态度,他是汇总审稿人的意见的,不管怎样,你都得好好改,给你修的机会就得好好珍惜,祝高中
暗香疏影
5楼2013-05-03 13:44:10
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

huomingying

银虫 (正式写手)

引用回帖:
3楼: Originally posted by yoyopku at 2013-05-03 13:41:06
第二个审稿人不是明确说了建议来个大修的么?~~
再说大修和小修都一样,都得改的审稿人满意,不知道给了多长时间。

之前不知道“major revision”就是大修,现在知道了。感觉专家的意见都挺对的,我都按照他们的意思进行了修改,好在都是小改动,就是改的地方多了点。我感觉我比原来对这篇论文满意了,不知道审稿专家怎么感觉啊!
6楼2013-05-03 13:45:58
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

huomingying

银虫 (正式写手)

引用回帖:
5楼: Originally posted by yuxinnick at 2013-05-03 13:44:10
大修小修主要是看主编的态度,他是汇总审稿人的意见的,不管怎样,你都得好好改,给你修的机会就得好好珍惜,祝高中

嗯,我感觉审稿意见都挺好的,我自认为修改的也挺仔细,还有一些专家没指出但是我感觉不完美的地方也做出了修改。希望能中吧,只能耐心等待了
7楼2013-05-03 13:49:43
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

nono2009

超级版主 (文学泰斗)

No gains, no pains.

优秀区长优秀区长优秀区长优秀区长优秀版主

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
huomingying: 金币+2 2013-05-03 14:04:15
看情况应该是大修。是否能录用取决于修改稿是否令编辑/审稿人满意
8楼2013-05-03 13:56:26
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

xhmaohan

木虫之王 (文学泰斗)

【答案】应助回帖


感谢参与,应助指数 +1
huomingying: 金币+1, ★★★很有帮助 2013-05-03 14:08:41
最好大修。至于是否能录用取决于修改稿是否令审稿人满意
9楼2013-05-03 14:03:03
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

huomingying

银虫 (正式写手)

引用回帖:
9楼: Originally posted by xhmaohan at 2013-05-03 14:03:03
最好大修。至于是否能录用取决于修改稿是否令审稿人满意

基本上按照审稿意见修改了,但是审稿意见中提到的都是比较小的修改,就是修改的地方多了些。主要内容基本没到,就是完善了一下。
10楼2013-05-03 14:09:54
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 huomingying 的主题更新
信息提示
请填处理意见