24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

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

sunshine_wk

银虫 (正式写手)

应助: 23 (小学生)
金币: 2312.8
帖子: 443
在线: 197.6小时
虫号: 1736827

[交流] 论文杯具

今天催了下自己一篇论文（RRC半个月），先是主编给我写了个邮件说你去找具体负责的编辑，很快，分管编辑回复了，然后我就杯具了。
只有一个审稿意见，明确拒稿的意见：
In my opinion, the content of the paper does not justify publication in NIM A. The information given is not sufficiently relevant for a broad audience. The content is highly technical, which is appropriate for an internal technical report, but not for a NIM A publication.
The quality of the paper is not up to NIM standards. The introduction lacks many crucial informations (information on the AMS detector, on the purpose of those radiators, the thermal environment, ...) and leaves the reader with many questions (what are the allowed temperature ranges, what are the consequences if those radiators get to warm or too cold?).
Abbreviations and technical terms are often not introduced.
The quality of the technical drawings is insufficient.
Not much effort has been put into the data analysis; mostly raw data (temperature readings plotted versus time) are presented.
The quality of language/phrasing is poor.
To bring this paper into an acceptable formal shape would require a large effort from the editor.

To summarize, my recommendation is to reject this paper.

总结了一下，他的意思是第一，读者群问题，第二，你的文章写的烂。
文章写得不好自己承认，意见很中肯。但是读者群不合适有点不理解，已经在这个期刊上发过一个规律研究了，这次是写特殊工况，怎么那个的意见就是能interest读者，这个就不行了？
于是给分管编辑写个邮件，首先说意见提得好，我们诚心接受，然后说但是读者群问题我们想解释一下，就解释了我们是一系列的研究，然后已经在你们这儿发过论文了，最后说这个审稿人的意见能够帮我们很大的改进文章，请问能不能给个再投的机会。
个人觉得读者群问题还是源于文章的写作问题，就像审稿人说的，很多信息都没介绍清楚。当然这一条没往信里写。
正在等回复，然后抓紧修改准备投的文章，改掉拒稿意见中提到的问题。

回复此楼