| ²é¿´: 870 | »Ø¸´: 5 | ||
| µ±Ç°Ö÷ÌâÒѾ´æµµ¡£ | ||
| ¡¾ÐüÉͽð±Ò¡¿»Ø´ð±¾ÌûÎÊÌ⣬×÷Õßchemtian½«ÔùËÍÄú 1 ¸ö½ð±Ò | ||
chemtian½ð³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
|
[ÇóÖú]
ÂÛÎÄÒªÕÒÀÏÍâÈóÉ«Ôõô°ì£¿
|
|
|
ÎÒͶµÂ¹úµÄÒ»¸öÓ¢ÎÄÆÚ¿¯£¬Éó¸åÈËÒÑ¾ÍÆ¼ö½ÓÊÕ£¬µ«È´ÒªÇóÎÒÕÒÒ»¸öÀÏÍâÈóÉ«£¨a polishing by a native speaker),ÒÔǰͶÆäËü¿¯ÎﶼûÓÐÕâÖÖÇé¿ö£¨½ÓÊÕºó¶¼ÓÉÓïÑԱ༰ïæÍê³ÉÁË£¬Õ⿯ÎïÌ«ÀÁÀ²£©£¬²»ÖªÔõô°ì£¿ÓÐÓ¢ÎĸßÈËÔ¸Òâ°ïæpolishingÂ𣿻òÕ߸øÒ»¸ö½¨Ò飬лл [ Last edited by chemtian on 2008-5-1 at 10:32 ] |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
285Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
085600²ÄÁÏÓ뻯¹¤301·ÖÇóµ÷¼ÁԺУ
ÒѾÓÐ19È˻ظ´
277¹¤¿ÆÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ11È˻ظ´
277Çóµ÷¼Á ÊýÒ»104·Ö
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´
304Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
336Çóµ÷¼Á£¬Ò»Ö¾Ô¸Öпƴó
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
071000ÉúÎïѧ£¬Ò»Ö¾Ô¸ÉîÛÚ´óѧ296·Ö£¬Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸±±¾©»¯¹¤085600 310·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ19È˻ظ´
274Çóµ÷¼ÁÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
Pharm.D
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 4149.9
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 1159
- ÔÚÏß: 14.4Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 329814
- ×¢²á: 2007-03-24
- רҵ: Ò©¼Áѧ
2Â¥2008-05-01 10:43:41
zwghuochetou
½ûÑÔ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
|
±¾ÌûÄÚÈݱ»ÆÁ±Î |
3Â¥2008-05-01 19:03:48
³æ³æ7832
ͳæ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 155
- Ìû×Ó: 46
- ÔÚÏß: 1.6Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 555705
- ×¢²á: 2008-05-09
4Â¥2008-05-12 18:11:25
napolun1025
ľ³æ (ÕýʽдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 2999.3
- Ìû×Ó: 547
- ÔÚÏß: 257.1Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 537637
- ×¢²á: 2008-04-01
- רҵ: ʳƷ¼Ó¹¤¼¼Êõ
5Â¥2008-05-12 18:38:44
xdweld
ľ³æ (ÕýʽдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 4201.7
- É¢½ð: 115
- Ìû×Ó: 798
- ÔÚÏß: 324.4Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 261124
- ×¢²á: 2006-06-18
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: Áã¼þ¼Ó¹¤ÖÆÔì
һƪӢÎÄÅ·ÌÕµÄÈóÉ« ½ð±Ò¸Ðл
|
Éó¸åÒâ¼ûÈçÏ£¬ ÎÒÏÈÈÏÕæ¸ÄÒ»±é£¬Çë³æÓÑÈóÉ«£¬½ð±Ò´óÁ¿µÄ¸Ðл£¡ÏÈÌáǰÕ÷ÓÑ£¬ÓÐÒâÕßÁªÏµ¡£ I have now received a referee's report on the paper which you have kindly submitted to the Journal of the European Ceramic Society. Comments it contains are given below. The referee has recognised that interesting and original results have been put forward in your paper. In view of the problems identified, however, I regret that I cannot accept the paper in its current form Reviewer #1: The authors describe some results that might be of interest for the varistor community but major rewriting is needed for the paper to be acceptable. 1. The discussion is hard to follow because of the English writing. In some places it is impossible to understand what is meant. The English must be improved greatly before this manuscript is accepted. Other compulsory revisions are the following: 2. The text describes the data presented in the figures 2-5, but there is no discussion about the possible reasons for such behavior. This is important to include. Reviewer #1: 1. The English in the paper needs correcting by a genuinely native standard English speaker as some sentences do not make sense at present. e.g. "When the temperature is below 1100?, the densification degree of the Bi2O3 is much more important than the reduction of the density due to the vaporization of Bi2O3." does not make sense. 2. Some references are "et al.". This is not permitted in this Journal. 3. In refs 11 and 12 "De RM" should not be abbreviated like this. |
6Â¥2008-08-11 12:28:53














»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥