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

天啊老蒋

铁虫 (小有名气)

应助: 7 (幼儿园)
金币: 465.2
散金: 173
红花: 3
帖子: 211
在线: 69小时
虫号: 1368451
注册: 2011-08-14
性别: GG
专业: 偏微分方程

[交流] JMAA的编辑给回信了，Reviewer的意见不是太明白，请各位兄弟姐妹们帮帮忙

直接就贴审稿意见了哈
The paper is written clearly and the analysis is well presented. However, the result is not very surprising, taking into account of the numerous results about the Riemann solutions in one space dimension and the calculations are explicit and straightforward. My further comments about the paper are listed below.
1. The flux term in the equation for conservation of energy in non-isentropic system (1.2) seems not correct.
2. I suggest the authors explain the meaning of u， p and especially e immediately after they are introduced. The internal energy e might cause confusion with the exponential symbol in various explicit formulas.
3. In the numerical test, the quantity A is chosen close to 1. If A is large, does the numerics still indicate the closeness between the isentropic and non-isentropic gas dynamic process?
4. If the authors could say something more about the general Cauchy data, it would be more attractive.
In sum, I recommend it for publication upon revision.

这里比较负面的是the result is not very surprising
正面的就是最后一句话。
问题是第四点意见我不知道怎么修改，因为现在柯西问题所有人都根本毫无实质性进展，所以都只能做黎曼问题，我只能在引言部分添加了自己的未来目标，计划当中跟柯西问题相关的内容，这样是不是就够了呢？
还有就是他的意见相对比较简单，所以我的回复意见只有一页多一点点，有没有关系，会不会嫌少？因为好多朋友说回复意见都十几页。。。

非常感谢。。。

回复此楼