24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 3149  |  回复: 8
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

angela1ying

铁虫 (初入文坛)

[求助] CEJ小修 审稿意见看不懂 已有2人参与

小妹第一次回复审稿意见,什么都不懂,请大家帮帮忙啊!
第一个审稿人,有两个地方看不懂。
1.Catalyst characterization is well performed and linked to activity tests, but for some DRX studies that should be performed on the spent catalysts (both the LDH-based and the obtained by incipient wetting) so to complete table 3 and related discussion.
催化剂有DRX这个表征吗?是什么?还是打错了,是XRD?
2.Regarding section 3.3, discussion could be extended by calculating TOFs at zero time for the catalysts used, not only the catalyst performance at high time values. Though, from an industrial point of view, these latter ones are the interesting ones, reaction rates are proportional to TOFs calculated at zero time, and they can suggest even higher differences in activity. As hydrogen seems to saturate at pressures higher than 5 MPa (though this is not stated by authors at the end of page 16), it is probable than hydrogenation kinetics could be simplified to first order, so the kinetic constants could be calculated instead of TOFs (and more discussion performed on this basis).
一开始叫我算TOF,后面又说instead of ?啥意思啊?到底是算还是不算?
第二个审稿人。
In my opinion the article, however, lack information about the reproducibility of the results, both in the production of the catalyst i.e. parameters achieved by it, as well as the results of the proposed process.
这个reproducibility指的是什么的重现性啊?

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

antericol

新虫 (小有名气)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
angela1ying: 金币+10, ★★★★★最佳答案 2015-01-08 12:03:45
第一个审稿人

1.Catalyst characterization is well performed and linked to activity tests, but for some DRX studies that should
没听说过DRX,应该是XRD

2.Regarding section 3.3, discussion could be extended by calculating TOFs at zero time for the catalysts used, not only the catalyst performance at high time values. Though, from an industrial point of view, these latter ones are the interesting ones, reaction rates are proportional to TOFs calculated at zero time, and they can suggest even higher differences in activity.
你应该算开始的TOF,看样子是你只算了后面的TOF,没算开始的。因为审稿人认为zero time TOF更能看出催化活性的区别。
As hydrogen seems to saturate at pressures higher than 5 MPa (though this is not stated by authors at the end of page 16), it is probable than hydrogenation kinetics could be simplified to first order, so the kinetic constants could be calculated instead of TOFs (and more discussion performed on this basis).
这段是说压力大于5 MPa后,催化剂可能已经饱和,氢化过程有可能简化为一级动力学,这样就可以算出动力学常数了。因为动力学常数比TOF更通用,可以算出来就不要用TOF来比较和讨论实验结果。

这两段不矛盾,因为压力小的时候动力学常数算不出来,所以你比较催化活性就用TOF,只是要把zero time TOF也包括进来。

第二个审稿人。
In my opinion the article, however, lack information about the reproducibility of the results, both in the production of the catalyst i.e. parameters achieved by it, as well as the results of the proposed process.

information about reproducibility 用人话说就是实验重复了没有?重复了几次?误差如何?我只是很震惊你报数据没报误差,难道不都是 平均值±标准差 这样的格式吗?再用脚注说明平均值是多少次重复实验
6楼2015-01-07 03:03:23
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 9 个回答

brucefan

专家顾问 (著名写手)


angela1ying(自私的猫1988代发): 金币+1, 鼓励交流 2015-01-31 15:29:17
第一个太专业,不敢乱说。第二个是说你的文章缺少一些让别人重复你的工作的细节。写文章要简洁,但更重要的是完整,要让内行读者能重复你的工作。

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
2楼2015-01-06 13:08:29
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

angela1ying

铁虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by brucefan at 2015-01-06 13:08:29
第一个太专业,不敢乱说。第二个是说你的文章缺少一些让别人重复你的工作的细节。写文章要简洁,但更重要的是完整,要让内行读者能重复你的工作。

谢谢你的回答,我主要是不明白他指的是哪个地方。他好像说了我催化剂制备的参数,是说得到的比表面什么的要有精度吗?还是要把制备参数说清楚?还有结果重复性又是什么?
3楼2015-01-06 15:58:17
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

brucefan

专家顾问 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖


感谢参与,应助指数 +1
angela1ying(自私的猫1988代发): 金币+1, 鼓励交流 2015-01-31 15:29:26
不是要精度,是你说的要各种参数。看就是说,要让别人看了你的文章能照着你的描述重复你的工作。你看别人的文章的时候也偶尔会想重复一些工作吧?

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
4楼2015-01-06 16:07:37
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
最具人气热帖推荐 [查看全部] 作者 回/看 最后发表
[基金申请] 29号明天会评吗 +4 笨笨唐 2026-08-28 4/200 2026-08-31 09:30 by huixian257
[基金申请] 中青基了要发朋友圈吗? +6 349506619 2026-08-28 6/300 2026-08-31 08:43 by kingkocxr
[基金申请] 基金不中,共勉 +12 eulota 2026-08-26 12/600 2026-08-31 08:42 by ZJTJZ
[基金申请] 面上意见出来了 +10 黄鸟于飞Chao 2026-08-29 19/950 2026-08-31 08:01 by blueearth171
[基金申请] 为什么到现在没收到通知? +5 tannykie 2026-08-29 5/250 2026-08-30 21:05 by purplejack
[基金申请] 麻烦专家们看看评委们的意见(F口面上) +6 gdd2018 2026-08-28 11/550 2026-08-30 08:58 by 超级无敌华子
[基金申请] 国自然评审意见 +13 wangmingqi 2026-08-28 19/950 2026-08-29 10:22 by Poppy1104
[基金申请] 2026年叶企孙基金 +4 bud_bud 2026-08-27 7/350 2026-08-29 07:23 by foolishmani
[基金申请] 系统查不到 +11 董八千 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-28 18:06 by Leogzhya
[基金申请] 基金未中,这种答复是模板吗? +5 zhaosm1982 2026-08-27 6/300 2026-08-27 16:00 by lfy8008
[基金申请] 看板上这么多中的,有点像50人群里49个人都是骗子的那种感觉…… +5 a089 2026-08-26 6/300 2026-08-27 14:05 by jonewore
[基金申请] 为什么 国际(地区)合作与交流项目 没有放榜? 10+3 majunge000 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-27 08:42 by 北京莱茵编辑
[基金申请] 出来了 +9 trojank 2026-08-26 9/450 2026-08-26 14:25 by 宝贝虫子
[基金申请] 为什么国自然不能直接公布 +4 bjdxyxy 2026-08-26 4/200 2026-08-26 13:12 by qingmu1201
[基金申请] 国合里面能看到了 +7 一怀馨秋 2026-08-26 7/350 2026-08-26 11:23 by zhaosm1982
[基金申请] 系统进不去 +4 yanglien 2026-08-26 5/250 2026-08-26 11:10 by wenfengw83
[基金申请] 牛来!米来!面来! +8 beefly 2026-08-26 8/400 2026-08-26 08:37 by xuzhipiao
[基金申请] 在坚冰还盖着北海的时候,我看到了怒放的梅花。 (金币+10) +6 ziyangfang 2026-08-25 9/450 2026-08-25 20:26 by huagongfeihu
[基金申请] 某些机构,以效率低为荣,以效率低作为存在感 +9 yuleib84 2026-08-25 10/500 2026-08-25 17:14 by alexon
[基金申请] 没有任何消息-是不是就凉了 +9 图啦图啦 2026-08-24 10/500 2026-08-25 11:59 by 南海小哥
信息提示
请填处理意见