24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
查看: 3987  |  回复: 14

wxldreamfly

银虫 (初入文坛)

[求助] Optics Letter 返回审稿意见,请大家支招,如何处理?多谢!

小弟投稿OL, 返回的审稿意见大多属于小修的写法问题,只有少量需要解释的东西,而且不难解释,根据审稿人意见如果按要求修改审稿人是好似倾向于中的,但是主编的决定是拒稿,请大家帮忙支招,这种情况是修改重投还是申请仲裁呢,以下是审稿意见:
Manuscript ID: xxxxxxx    Type: Regular
Title: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dear Sir/Madam:

A decision has been made on the above manuscript.  As a co-author, I thought you'd be interested in seeing the referee comments.  In view of their recommendations, I cannot accept the manuscript for publication in Optics Letters.  If there are no reviewer comments below, please contact the corresponding author to view them.

Sincerely,
xxxxxxxxxx
Topical Editor, Optics Letters

---------------------------

Reviewer comments are provided here:

Reviewer 1
The paper presents a study of light tunneling through a metamaterial around the negative-zero-positive frequency, tracing parallels to similar effects and results obtained in electron transport in graphene. The lateral shift is shown to vary from positive to negative values depending on which side of the Dirac Point the simulations is performed. Results for tunneling time and velocity are also presented.

My recommendation is that this work should be accepted with a few changes pointed below.

1 - Missing reference at "It has been shownthat,when ωep=ωmp=ωD and γ=0 (noloss), the dispersion of the NZPIM satisfies a linear equation k2(ω)=(ω−ωD)/υD."

2 - In the text where fig 2a and b are explained, the authors referred to "the saturation value" when they seem to mean the magnitude (abs) of this value.

3 - The numerical values for some parameters could not be found in the paper, making it impossible to reproduce, in special ωD and γ.

4 -Ref. 16 is wrong; the correct volume for this publication is 65, not 4. Please check other references carefully.

5 - The authors seem to use γ=0, but that is not explicit in the paper. If that is the case, it's important to discuss the effects of a larger γ, specially since all current metamaterial implementations show significant losses. How would those impact the results in an experimental setup?



Reviewer 2
The authors discussed the interesting Goos-Hanchen shift and Hartman effect in negative-zero-positive index materials (NZPIMs). I really approciate the selection of this topic while there are quite some questions to be answered in the current manuscript and quite some corrections are needed.

1. One interesting property of a NZPIM is the refractive index can be negative, positive and ZERO. The authors discussed the properties at frequencies with either negative and positive material while left zero-index material intact;
2. The hartman effect in NZPIM is to be discovered and I am expecting to obtain some physical explanation of the saturation time/length, for instance the magnitude or the origin. While I don't see any explanation but only numerical observations;
3. The dramatic change of tunneling time when barrier thickness is an interesting observation. It can vary from negative to positive. The author need to present more results (at least more incident angles) before a conclusion is drawn due to "linear dispersion of NZPIM" though I can barely follow the logic;
4. Figure 2 is poorly organized. symbols are missing in legend. Given the extra space left, my advice is to seperate Figure 2;
5. I guess, wD, an important parameter is set at 10GHz while it never appear anywhere in the main text;
6. Equ (1) and (2) are for e2 and u2 instead of e1 and u1. Equ (8) is unreadable. Even a typo at address.

Unfortunatly, I cannot recommend the publication of this manuscript based on current quality.

[ Last edited by avast2009 on 2013-6-19 at 21:12 ]
回复此楼

» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐

论文投稿交流的收集

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

快乐最重要!其它的没什么大不了!
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 )

leefio

银虫 (小有名气)

前几天小修修回后被编辑拒稿的人路过。。。。
如果有一天。。。
8楼2013-06-17 15:46:37
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

unclee

木虫 (正式写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
zhenghaiw: 金币+1, 感谢应答 2013-06-16 22:55:52
wxldreamfly: 金币+19, ★★★很有帮助 2013-06-18 06:13:42
从第2个审稿人的意见来看,文章是需要大修的。但OL现在已不接受大修,所以主编给据了。建议楼主修改重投,中的机会还是很大的。
2楼2013-06-16 21:28:49
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

xautldhldh

木虫之王 (文坛精英)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
wxldreamfly: 金币+10, 有帮助 2013-06-18 06:14:03
同意二楼的意见,第二个审稿人应该是建议大修。
3楼2013-06-17 00:12:12
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

lu_hua

金虫 (正式写手)

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
好好写个回复,再投
9楼2013-06-17 20:27:45
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

幻灭牙

捐助贵宾 (职业作家)

根据审稿意见修改,另投。
13楼2013-06-18 12:59:14
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

huaguo168

禁虫 (正式写手)


感谢参与,应助指数 +1
wxldreamfly: 金币+1 2013-06-18 06:14:14
本帖内容被屏蔽

4楼2013-06-17 01:00:42
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

wxldreamfly

银虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by unclee at 2013-06-16 21:28:49
从第2个审稿人的意见来看,文章是需要大修的。但OL现在已不接受大修,所以主编给据了。建议楼主修改重投,中的机会还是很大的。

那么想问下:主编意思是直接拒稿还是建议大修呢?换句话,如果是大修,是否有提示要作者重新投稿呢?
快乐最重要!其它的没什么大不了!
5楼2013-06-17 09:18:30
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

伤哒心

至尊木虫 (知名作家)

【答案】应助回帖


感谢参与,应助指数 +1
wxldreamfly: 金币+1 2013-06-18 06:14:29
修改后重投吧,问题不大。
走别人的路,让别人无路可走
6楼2013-06-17 09:26:17
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

muchongwoai

至尊木虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
wxldreamfly: 金币+5, 有帮助 2013-06-18 06:14:43
虽然没中过OL,但是平常关注很多,确实,OL已经没有大修,看审稿意见,如果修改后重投,希望应该很大。。。
努力不一定成功,但放弃一定失败
7楼2013-06-17 10:47:57
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

paperhunter

荣誉版主 (文学泰斗)

还没想好

优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
wxldreamfly: 金币+3, 有帮助 2013-06-18 06:15:22
在审稿人的意见没有明显错误的情况下申诉效率太低,如果楼主可以令人信服地回答执负面意见审稿人提出的问题并作出到位的修改,是可以重投的。
咱也是有组织的人了...
10楼2013-06-17 20:35:30
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 wxldreamfly 的主题更新
信息提示
请填处理意见