| 查看: 1346 | 回复: 6 | |||||||||||
yct200703金虫 (小有名气)
|
[求助]
请大家帮忙分析一下审稿意见！
|
|
Dear Prof. Wang, Reviewers' comments on your work have now been received. You will see that they are advising against publication of your work. Therefore I must reject it. For your guidance, I append the reviewers' comments below. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider your work. Yours sincerely, Hikaru Kobayashi, Doctor of Science Editor Reviewers' comments: The manuscript reports short circuit current and energy conversion efficiency enhancements . The results are interpreted in term of enhanced absorption cross section from Au nanoparticles resulting in enhanced photogeneration of electron-hole pairs in semiconductor. The work may be interesting, but it is not suitable for publication in the present form. The following questions must be addressed before it can be further considered: (1) It is well known that surface plasmon resonances depend strongly on the size, shape, and volume fractions of metal nanoparticles. (2) External quantum efficiency (EQE or IPCE) is not presented. This is the most important characterization method for the discussion of any enhanced photocurrent, particularly, if the enhanced photocurrent is surface plasmon resonances-dependent. Therefore individual EQE curves are needed. (3) Placing nanoparticles in the front surface of solar cell could cause light shading effect or short wavelength destructive interference issue (different theories give different interpretation). The authors need to comment why these are not happen on their solar cell. (4) The results do not support authors'conclusions. Authors' statement on enhanced photogeneration of electron-hole pairs in semiconductor as a cause of short circuit current (Jsc) increase is based on a speculation. To claim such a conclusion, authors must present experimental evidence that the absorption coefficients of solar cell are indeed increased. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
谈谈两天一夜的“延安行”
已经有15人回复
-
EST投稿状态问题
已经有6人回复
-
职称评审没过，求安慰
已经有15人回复
-
垃圾破二本职称评审标准
已经有11人回复
-
投稿Elsevier的Neoplasia杂志，到最后选publishing options时页面空白，不能完成投稿
已经有16人回复
-
毕业后当辅导员了，天天各种学生超烦
已经有4人回复
-
聘U V热熔胶研究人员
已经有10人回复
-
求助文献
已经有3人回复
-
投稿返修后收到这样的回复，还有希望吗
已经有8人回复
-
三无产品还有机会吗
已经有6人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 关于审稿意见，不太理解，求大神帮忙
已经有3人回复
- 麻烦大家帮忙看看这个审稿意见怎么回复
已经有4人回复
- 请帮忙看看审稿人写的审稿意见是什么意思啊？
已经有8人回复
- 请帮忙分析一个玻璃的dsc曲线，想知道各个峰表示什么含义。
已经有3人回复
- 催化剂寿命的单位，请大家帮忙分析一下，谢谢
已经有6人回复
- 求高人帮忙分析下APL审稿意见
已经有7人回复
- 专家审稿意见，请大家帮忙分析！
已经有5人回复
- 审稿意见回来了，大家帮忙看看！非常感谢！接受了散金币哈！
已经有13人回复
- ImechE Power and Energy 第二次大修，请大家帮忙分析一下怎么回复审稿人
已经有10人回复
- 急求大家帮忙翻译一下一句审稿回复
已经有8人回复
- synthetic metals 投稿，审稿意见， 请各位帮忙分析一下！
已经有6人回复
- 大家帮我分析一下material and design的审稿意见，录用几率大不？
已经有24人回复
- 审稿意见回来了，大家帮忙看一下。。
已经有9人回复
- 文章的审稿意见，大家帮忙看看！
已经有6人回复
- 【求助】请求大家帮忙看一下审稿人的回复
已经有6人回复
- 帮忙分析审稿意见
已经有4人回复
- 审稿意见，大家帮忙看看
已经有8人回复
- 请大家帮忙看看如何回复审稿意见
已经有4人回复
- 论文一审回来了，有一些审稿意见，请大家帮我看看是什么意思。
已经有5人回复
- 审稿意见回来，一个审稿人让据，编辑说大修，大家帮我看看希望大不
已经有24人回复
summerbear
木虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 7 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 2060.4
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 104
- 在线: 42.5小时
- 虫号: 575311
- 注册: 2008-06-18
- 性别: MM
- 专业: 生物大分子结构与功能
【答案】应助回帖
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
【答案】应助回帖
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
【答案】应助回帖
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
jinwei331
至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 3742 (副教授)
- 金币: 28683.7
- 红花: 73
- 沙发: 1
- 帖子: 26959
- 在线: 1170.4小时
- 虫号: 2085922
- 注册: 2012-10-25
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 机械测试理论与技术
【答案】应助回帖
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
zhangslafd
铜虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 40 (小学生)
- 金币: 793.4
- 散金: 19
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 481
- 在线: 139.7小时
- 虫号: 2100949
- 注册: 2012-11-01
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 凝聚态物性 II ：电子结构
【答案】应助回帖
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
【答案】应助回帖
感谢参与，应助指数 +1