24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 6104  |  回复: 38
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

zxf281

金虫 (小有名气)

[交流] 第一篇SCI 现在状态是Resive 没标大修还是小修 请各位前辈帮忙看下希望大不 已有4人参与

小弟第一次投SCI 水平很一般的 投的是Elsevier的Ocean Engineering
去年12月投的初稿,编辑返回说修改英语后,改好后1月份重新提交,然后很快的进入了with editor状态,一直到5月11号才under review,6月1号状态变成了Required Reviews Completed
今天状态变成了resive并收到主编编来信
第一篇SCI 现在状态是Resive 没标大修还是小修 请各位前辈帮忙看下希望大不
编辑的意见如下:
The reviewers have commented on your above paper submitted to Ocean Engineering. They indicated that it is not acceptable for publication in its present form.

However, if you feel that you can suitably address the reviewers' comments (included below) by Jul 20, 2015, I invite you to revise and resubmit your manuscript.

Please carefully address the issues raised in the comments. If a reviewer indicates that comments were uploaded in a separate file, this can be found by clicking "View Reviewer Attachments" under "Action Links" on your Author Main Page.
一共有两个审稿人意见
第一个:
The paper describes a predictive control method for a water hydraulic variable ballast system for submersible vehicles.

1. The paper has many grammatical issues that need to be addressed.  I have outlined them directly on the attached manuscript.
2. On page 8, more detail is needed describing....后面就不例举了,都是写修改格式和添加详细描述的意见
第二个:
Yes, using the ballast tank is effective than the jet to control submersible vehicles. The depth and pitch control can be done by using the ballast tanks.
This paper focuses on the implementation of the system not to providing contributions of this paper clearly. For examples, Figs. 17 ~ 22 are not readable.
The meaning of showing the figures is not clear. There are two figure 21's.
In the revision, the major contribution of this research should be emphasized in stead of describing the general issues in detail.

我请问一下各位前辈,这算大修还是小修,第二个审稿专家说论文的贡献不够突出,是不是在Abstract和Introduction中添加一些本文研究工作的目的和意义的描述呀?
还有这种意见修改后再提交,录用的希望大不大呀?
回复此楼
--!
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

yww0912

铁杆木虫 (知名作家)

★ ★
zxf281: 金币+2, 谢谢 2015-06-06 16:56:14
楼主好棒啊!

[ 发自小木虫客户端 ]
6楼2015-06-06 16:39:43
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 39 个回答

zhswee

铁杆木虫 (著名写手)

★ ★ ★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
zxf281: 金币+2, 谢谢! 2015-06-06 16:25:54
大修小修意义不大,好好按照审稿意见修改,祝福

[ 发自小木虫客户端 ]
2楼2015-06-06 16:19:59
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

WolfYang

至尊木虫 (职业作家)

★ ★ ★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
zxf281: 金币+2, 嗯嗯,谢谢 2015-06-06 16:26:52
编辑的决定是修改后重投,他已明确说了,拒绝你当前的版本的论文,希望你认真按审稿人意见修改,再投,录用的希望很大!加油!这个期刊很好的

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
3楼2015-06-06 16:21:37
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

Mei221991

至尊木虫 (著名写手)

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
zxf281: 金币+4, 谢谢你的意见 2015-06-06 16:27:31
肯定是大修,时间一般一个月,你这个更长,小修一般一周。另外一般涉及内容更改的都是大修。只要好好改希望很大,毕竟主编现在站在你这边。至于文章创新点你要突出,对这个审稿人的意见重点回复,必要时可以在文章一些重要位置再强调一下。

[ 发自小木虫客户端 ]
4楼2015-06-06 16:23:32
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
普通表情 高级回复 (可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见