24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

lprubbish

新虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
帖子: 1
在线: 2.7小时
虫号: 2932575
注册: 2014-01-15

[交流] 第一次投SCI被拒，求指导啊。

各位虫友，今年3月份投稿wireless communication and mobile computing，今天收到拒信。看了两个reviewer的意见，感觉第一个reviewer貌似是没看懂文章的某些部分，混淆了我的scenario 1和scenario 2，感觉唯一有建设性的意见的就是reviewer 2的最后一个意见，但我也可以解释清楚的。总觉得这两个reviewers的意见不足以让文章reject吧？请问各位虫友看法，我是否应该改正后重投这个刊物。如果再选刊物的话，这篇文章是认知无线电Cognitive Radio 物理层方面的长文，求推进刊物啊！审稿周期快点最好~

In view of the comments of the referee(s) found at the bottom of this letter, I must decline your paper for publication in Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing.

Thank you for considering Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing for the publication of your research. I hope the outcome of this specific submission will not discourage you from submitting future manuscripts.

Referee(s)' Comments to Author:

Reviewing: 1

Comments to the Author
Paper is well structured. But some additional explanations well be welcome.
For example in section 1.2 a small introduction to sensor censoring will help to understand the work.
Also, how a SU is informed about the global decision made in the FC? It is not clear.
In section 5 I only see the situation for Scenario I.
And in section 7.3 it is said the scenarios are discussed in section 6, but that section is abut SNR.

Reviewing: 2

Comments to the Author
Authors have explored an interesting area of cooperative spectrum sensing and proposed a detection scheme for small-scale primary users. flow of the paper from the reader’s point.

1. The authors mention that their scheme is optimal for any type of topology. I concern that there is no demonstration, and no comparison for simulations.
2. Line 10 in Algorithm 1: Operate Algorithm 1 in [2] based on fixed Sk. I consider that if there should be Algorithm I. The whole article has lots of “Algorithm 1” and “Algorithm I”. The authors should take this into account.
3. Equation (28): Please confirm this equation.
4. Section 7.1: There is a sentence “In this specific case, the throughput… is not unimodal (y7 > y5 > y6 in Fig.5), which indicates…the local optimal point”. I think that the authors should point out that y7, y6, and y5 belong to which curve, and explain why.
5. The results of the proposed model are presented for analysis without any comparison of the numerical results and simulated results.

回复此楼