| ²é¿´: 1525 | »Ø¸´: 3 | |||
78367795½ð³æ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
|
[½»Á÷]
¾Ü¸ãµÄÀíÓÉÊÇÓëÆÚ¿¯ÄÚÈݲ»·ûÄÜRebuttal²» ÒÑÓÐ3È˲ÎÓë
|
|
ÎÄÕÂͶoptics and laser technology±»¾Ü¸åÁË£¬Á½¸öReview£¬Ò»¸ö½ÓÊÜ£¬Ò»¸ö¾Ü¸ã£¬¾Ü¸ãµÄÀíÓÉÊÇÓëÆÚ¿¯ÄÚÈݲ»·û£¬ÏëÎÊÏÂÕâÖÖÇé¿öÄÜRebuttal²»£¿»áÓÐЧ¹û²»£¿ Reviewer #2: I think the revised vesion is Okay to be accepted. Reviewer #3: I maintain my decision. This paper is not suitable for this journal. Moreover, both the abstract and the highlight are discriptive without numerical indicators to give clues to the ocasional readers. In fact, both are uninteresting. Figure 6 don't convince me about the suitabiliness for this high experiments-targeted journal. The paper is very confusing to read (too much theory). My sugestion is to submit this paper on a more targeted journal (image processing journal, e.g., on one of the journals listed in references). |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøT0PÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8.O.55.1.O.5.4,¿ÆÄ¿È«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøT0PÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8O.55.1.O.5.4,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
2026Äê8ÔÂ25ÈÕ¹ú×ÔÈ»·Å°ñǰͻȻÊÕµ½ÁÐÈëÆÀÉóר¼ÒÓʼþ£¬ÓйØÏµÂð£¿
ÒѾÓÐ20È˻ظ´
½ñÌìÎñί»á¿ªÍêÁË£¬Ã÷Ìì³ö½á¹ûÂð
ÒѾÓÐ22È˻ظ´
ÔÚ¼á±ù»¹¸Ç×ű±º£µÄʱºò£¬ÎÒ¿´µ½ÁËŷŵÄ÷»¨¡£
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
Ã÷ÌìÓ¦¸Ã¿É²éÁË£¡£¿
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
ÓÐûÓдóÉñ°ïÎÒ¿´¿´»ù½ð´úÂë
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
·Å°ñǰµÄ²»µ¶¨
ÒѾÓÐ19È˻ظ´
ijЩ»ú¹¹£¬ÒÔЧÂʵÍΪÈÙ£¬ÒÔЧÂʵÍ×÷Ϊ´æÔÚ¸Ð
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
2026¹ú×ÔÈ»º¯ÆÀ·Ñµ½ÕË
ÒѾÓÐ23È˻ظ´
huanghuasjtu
ľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
- Ó¦Öú: 241 (´óѧÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 20656.8
- ºì»¨: 5
- Ìû×Ó: 3004
- ÔÚÏß: 576.5Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 2123410
- ×¢²á: 2012-11-13
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ½ðÊô·Ç¾§Ì¬¡¢×¼¾§ºÍÄÉÃ×¾§

2Â¥2013-05-20 10:11:55
goslar
ľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
ÎÒ²»ÔÙÓ¦Öú!
- Ó¦Öú: 118 (¸ßÖÐÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 3592.7
- ºì»¨: 6
- Ìû×Ó: 3115
- ÔÚÏß: 174.5Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 1547023
- ×¢²á: 2011-12-22
- ÐÔ±ð: MM
- רҵ: ÃâÒßÉúÎïѧ

3Â¥2013-05-20 10:19:04
|
4Â¥2013-05-20 10:28:36









»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥
20