24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
查看: 2018  |  回复: 6

motou

新虫 (初入文坛)

[交流] IET IMAGE PROCESSING 被拒重投reject resubmit怎么办,看看意见已有3人参与

第一次投,这种中的概率如何
审稿人会变不
Reviewer: 1

Comments to the Author
1.) Please provide the full names for the following abbreviations at their first appear place.
SIFT (Scale-Invariant Feature Transform), SURF (Speeded-Up Robust Features), RDA(Range Doppler Algorithm)
ADA= Average Detection Rate? IRA= Imaging Radar Angle? From it Experiment part Section B, It seems like Initial Rotation Angle for ISAR.
2.) It’s very tough to understand some author defined abbreviations such as TIs and CIs, even from the corresponding section in page2. TI =ISAR images of space targets, CI=Those of interesting components,
After many times reading through the manuscript, I got it. So, I suggested the author change them to the following and make them easier to the readership.
TI=Targets of Interest, CI= Components of Interest target.
3.) Figure.3 legend (a), (b), then should be followed by (c), and (d).
4.) Actually, it’s only the ‘Satellite’ model for TI and ‘cabin’ and ‘solar panel’ model for CI are adopted and simulated. The real ISAR raw data and image after RDA maybe not available, however, the author should provide more details about the simulated ISAR raw data(before imaging using RDA) to make the reader convince that the simulated data is also ok.
5.) The author should make the reader convince that what advantages we can achieve for the component detection from the ISAR image data instead of raw data. What factors can affect the final image intensity, SIFT/SURF feature of the component, such as the RCS of the component for detection, etc.
6.) The author need to explain the range of 3 deg of IRA-ADA from theory(Fig.6(b)), since there is an obvious drop in 3 deg).
7.)Considering the main novelty of this paper, that is, SIFT and SURF feature from ISAR image are adopted and analized, and FPE(feature probabilistic estimation) is used for interesting component detection. So, the method is specific for feature extraction in ISAR images, accordingly, the title need to be more specific. However, the current title seems too general. Additionally, only the satellite mode is adopted for simulation.


Reviewer: 2

Comments to the Author
The paper definitely needs rewriting. In its current form, it is ABSOLUTELY UNREADABLE. The authors start explaining the before defining the problem: in section II, an algorithm is presented that does what exactly?! Not a single ISAR image is presented to show what authors are looking for, and what are the challenges that are tackled.

Despite all my efforts, I just couldn't understand what the authors are doing. My recommendation is to reject the paper, with the option to resubmit. My advice for the authors is to rewrite the whole paper from scratches.

Reviewer: 3

Comments to the Author
In consequence, I rate this paper can be accepted in the journal with minor revisions. Please consider the comments as below.
1) In the section I, the word surveillance is repeatedly used for introduction. It is suggested to avoid using this word, because this word has strong military sense and it is not suitable in this paper. In this paper, the feature is extracted to identify the target whether a kind of space target with certain structures. Therefore, the identification may be a better choice.
2) In this paper, there are many abbreviations, e.g., FPE, DA, WGPDF, CI, TI, SIFT, SURF, CDA, ADA and so on, are used but not always used in expressions, which may seriously affect the normal reading, It is suggest to reduce the usages of abbreviations or give an abbreviation list for readers.
3) Why interesting components is abbreviated as CIs? Why it is not ICs. Also images of space targets should be abbreviated as Its.
4) What the meaning of ADA? I cannot find the whole words for this abbreviation.
It is suggested to add some comparison or comments among these existing low-complexity methods.
6) For the performance analysis in Section III, the SNR should be changed from minus dB to positive dB to meet the reader’s customs.
7) It is better to add some ISAR feature identification methods and add some comparisons among the existing methods and proposed method to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.
--
** The use of English must be substantially improved before resubmission. **
第一个好搞定
第二个不知道咋办
第三个最后的补充我好无语,要不要补,没时间了
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

beautybanana

木虫 (著名写手)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
逻辑结构不合理, 导致审稿人看不懂你在说什么, 建议重新整理文章结构,重投. 你仔细思考思考.
2楼2014-07-02 14:19:35
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

hxgu

木虫 (正式写手)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
写作肯定还是有问题,但也不至于被第二个人打击的太厉害,毕竟其他两个人都大致看懂了啊
建议好好修改,一方面是针对第一第三个的意见一一修改,另一方面是针对第二个人的意见全文文字表达看是否可以找个高手愠色一下最好,你说第三个人要补充就好好补充毕竟他开始说can be accepted in the journal with minor revisions
3楼2014-07-02 15:31:05
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

motou

新虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by beautybanana at 2014-07-02 14:19:35
逻辑结构不合理, 导致审稿人看不懂你在说什么, 建议重新整理文章结构,重投. 你仔细思考思考.

应该是我那些缩写符号乱得很,导致他们没看懂,貌似1.3个都是说符号问题
4楼2014-07-03 12:03:23
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

motou

新虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
3楼: Originally posted by hxgu at 2014-07-02 15:31:05
写作肯定还是有问题,但也不至于被第二个人打击的太厉害,毕竟其他两个人都大致看懂了啊
建议好好修改,一方面是针对第一第三个的意见一一修改,另一方面是针对第二个人的意见全文文字表达看是否可以找个高手愠色一 ...

这篇之前改了很多遍,导致改得好乱,那个实验增加实测确实不合适,不知道跟他说下处境,能不能理解,就是跟他说下而不补充,确实没办法补充实测
5楼2014-07-03 12:04:55
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

hxgu

木虫 (正式写手)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
引用回帖:
5楼: Originally posted by motou at 2014-07-03 12:04:55
这篇之前改了很多遍,导致改得好乱,那个实验增加实测确实不合适,不知道跟他说下处境,能不能理解,就是跟他说下而不补充,确实没办法补充实测...

只能是试一下了,感觉第三个还是比较支持你的,说清楚理由应该没事
6楼2014-07-03 12:32:46
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

blackandstar

银虫 (小有名气)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
你好,我有篇iet的论文跟你相同的情况。请问你这篇最后怎么样了,reject and resubmit会找新的审稿人吗?

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
7楼2015-12-23 11:05:09
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 motou 的主题更新
普通表情 高级回复(可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见