| 查看: 539 | 回复: 0 | ||
[求助]
只给了一个审稿人的意见，修改后不明白编辑的意思
|
|
编辑只给了一个审稿人的意见，我恢复了以后，编辑的意见如下：不知怎么个意思？ Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: The revisions made improve the manuscript significantly. However, I would like the figure showing the effect of Guinadine nitrate concentration on RR included in the manuscript. Once that is done, it can be accepted for publication. ALSO: For some reason there was no response to reviewer 2's comments: Recommendation (please tick one) Accept without modification: Request modifications: X (Complete Sections B and C of report form) Reject: (Complete Section D of report form) A. General Commentary Judgement of Paper: 6.5 (Use scale of 1-10. 1 = Poor, 5 = Marginal, 8 = Good, 10 - Exceptional ) In reading the manuscript, I caught a few mistakes. In the Abstract section the word "rate" is misspelled "rat." Page 8 - During CMP, cuprous oxides can be as inhibitors to maintain a low etch rate of copper in the trench…. It would appear at least a word is missing, perhaps this could be better stated as - cuprous oxide may act as an inhibitor…." Page 11 - "As we can be seen from Figure 9(b)….." The grammar seems awkward. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
所感
已经有3人回复
-
要不要辞职读博？
已经有7人回复
-
不自信的我
已经有11人回复
-
北核录用
已经有3人回复
-
实验室接单子
已经有3人回复
-
磺酰氟产物，毕不了业了！
已经有8人回复
-
求助:我三月中下旬出站，青基依托单位怎么办？
已经有10人回复
-
26申博（荧光探针方向，有机合成）
已经有4人回复
-
论文终于录用啦！满足毕业条件了
已经有26人回复
-
2026年机械制造与材料应用国际会议 （ICMMMA 2026）
已经有4人回复