| 查看: 5360 | 回复: 27 | |||
| 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 | |||
mlshmily木虫 (著名写手)
|
[交流]
Revise-大修还是小修？第二个审稿人什么意思？ 已有14人参与
|
||
|
收到Elsevier期刊的审稿意见：Revise。 但不知道大修还是小修，似乎是Elsevier的审稿意见模板。好像是修改重投，是新投稿吗？ 另外，第二个审稿人什么意思？有人说比较危险，他是拒审的意思，可能因为论文太差了。 还有戏吗？ 请明白人点拨一二。谢谢！ Dear XXXX, The reviewers have commented on your above paper. They indicated that it is not acceptable for publication in its present form. However, if you feel that you can suitably address the reviewers' comments (included below), the Editor In Chief invites you to revise and resubmit your manuscript. Please carefully address the issues raised in the comments. If you are submitting a revised manuscript, please also: a) outline each change made (point by point) as raised in the reviewer comments AND/OR b) provide a suitable rebuttal to each reviewer comment not addressed Yours sincerely, Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: I think this manuscript addressed an interesting and potentially promising topic. Also, it is obvious that the authors did an extensive search on the existing reports and research literature. However, I feel that this paper have some areas that need to be addressed. First, I disagree with the authors' organization of contents……... Second, ……. Third, the paper should shorten the section on ……. Fourth, …… Finally, the writing in some sections can be improved (e.g., the last paragraph in page 3). I hope the authors find the review helpful and wish them good luck with their research in this area. Reviewer #2: The work is interesting but I wasn't convinced that the discussion or conclusions achieved that much apart from saying the obvious. I did like the way the discussion drew down data from a number of sources thus providing an uninformed reader with a range of good background facts and figures. I would have preferred to see more ambition in the paper's aim. There are many minor errors - often the definite article is missed out, quite a number of spelling errors, some references are very old yet are used to support current understanding. These all need attention. I thought the sources of data were in need of more care. There are other sources that are probably better than some that are mentioned. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
AI 太可怕了，写基金时，提出想法，直接生成的文字比自己想得深远，还有科学性
已经有9人回复
-
依托企业入选了国家启明计划青年人才。有无高校可以引进的。
已经有11人回复
-
依托企业入选了国家启明计划青年人才。有无高校可以引进的。
已经有10人回复
-
同年申请2项不同项目，第1个项目里不写第2个项目的信息，可以吗
已经有9人回复
-
表哥与省会女结婚，父母去帮带孩子被省会女气回家生重病了
已经有7人回复
-
天津大学招2026.09的博士生，欢迎大家推荐交流（博导是本人）
已经有9人回复
mlshmily
木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 18 (小学生)
- 金币: 3640.7
- 散金: 15
- 红花: 15
- 帖子: 1543
- 在线: 330.2小时
- 虫号: 82703
- 注册: 2005-07-26
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 管理经济学
|
The reviewers have commented on your above paper. They indicated that it is not acceptable for publication in its present form. However, if you feel that you can suitably address the reviewers' comments (included below), the Editor In Chief invites you to revise and resubmit your manuscript. 这个好像是Elsevier的模版，退修。 但第二个审稿人意见不明确，有人说是写得太差，审稿人没时间细审，浪费时间。是这样吗？很难领会啊。 请达人指点。 |
11楼2014-02-05 11:21:24
Fung66
木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 39 (小学生)
- 金币: 6885.9
- 散金: 2828
- 红花: 29
- 沙发: 1
- 帖子: 1863
- 在线: 1051.1小时
- 虫号: 2840774
- 注册: 2013-12-01
- 专业: 无机非金属类光电信息与功
2楼2014-02-05 00:08:48
3楼2014-02-05 00:16:54
kingki
至尊木虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 465 (硕士)
- 金币: 23871.8
- 散金: 6101
- 红花: 18
- 帖子: 7931
- 在线: 601小时
- 虫号: 514983
- 注册: 2008-02-29
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 电化学
4楼2014-02-05 00:22:54