| 查看: 2327 | 回复: 6 | |||
| 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 | |||
[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
有多少人是今天查系统知道结果的？
已经有17人回复
-
为什么资助数各大高校都创新高，自己申请怎么就这么难
已经有3人回复
-
基金未中，这种答复是模板吗？
已经有4人回复
-
导师吐槽：我怎么摊上了这么个极品研究生！
已经有5人回复
-
怎么看青基中了没有啊
已经有5人回复
-
梦想
已经有3人回复
-
面上合作单位盖章
已经有3人回复
-
看板上这么多中的，有点像50人群里49个人都是骗子的那种感觉……
已经有5人回复
-
基金不中，共勉
已经有7人回复
-
为什么 国际(地区)合作与交流项目 没有放榜？
已经有11人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- IET论文被拒了，该如何是好
已经有25人回复
- 投稿IET RSN被Reject with resubmit，顺便请各位虫友帮忙看看这个审稿意见
已经有5人回复
- Reject with Resubmit 还有希望吗？
已经有9人回复
- Taylor & Francis 的 Reject & Resubmit，请大家看看怎么办
已经有17人回复
- IET Control Theory & Applications 决定Reject with Resubmit
已经有11人回复
- 被reject后 再resubmit 严格按着审稿人的意见修改的 会有多大几率接收呢
已经有7人回复
- 有没有两个审稿人一个拒，一个大修，然后编辑reject但是可以resubmit
已经有16人回复
- 请问 Reject (revise and resubmit) 后重投还有希望吗？
已经有8人回复
4楼2014-07-03 12:03:23
beautybanana
木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 23 (小学生)
- 贵宾: 0.02
- 金币: 2973.8
- 散金: 5088
- 红花: 26
- 帖子: 1694
- 在线: 485.8小时
- 虫号: 1142157
- 注册: 2010-11-09
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 纳米生物学
2楼2014-07-02 14:19:35
3楼2014-07-02 15:31:05
5楼2014-07-03 12:04:55
10