24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 1512  |  回复: 2

yuheyang0919

新虫 (初入文坛)

[交流] Rejection & resubmit........是不是没希望了已有2人参与

第一篇SCI,投了一个比较水的,今天得到回复。。。
编辑:
In view of the criticisms of the reviewer(s), I must decline the manuscript for publication at this time. However, a new manuscript may be submitted which takes into consideration these comments.

I consider that the work needs to be taken further before it will be ready for publication in our journal.

Please note that resubmitting your manuscript does not guarantee eventual acceptance, and that your resubmission will be subject to re-review by the reviewer(s) before a decision is rendered.

You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of your manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer.

I look forward to a resubmission, but please take as long as you need to make the substantial improvements that are required.

审稿人1:
Comments:
In this paper,a vibration probe sensor is designed and evaluated. Experimental results validate the performance of the proposed sensor and the regression model. The work is interesting, but some specific points have to be improved:
1. The advantage and disadvantage of the vibration probe sensor compared with other techniques mentioned in the introduction should be elaborated.
2. The impact force of the probe is associated with the mass flow rate of particles. Please add the analysis of the relationship between the measurement signal and the mass flow rate.
3. Please analyze the generalizability of the regression models in equations (10) and (11).
4. The quality of figures should be improved, including the resolution of pictures, and the size and font of text.


Additional Questions:
1. Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: yes

2. Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any significant work ignored?: The paper demonstrated an adequate understanding of the relevant literature.

3. Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: yes

4. Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: not completely

5. Implications for research, practice and/or society: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for research, practice and/or society? Does the paper bridge the gap between theory and practice? How can the research be used in practice (economic and commercial impact), in teaching, to influence public policy, in research (contributing to the body of knowledge)? What is the impact upon society (influencing public attitudes, affecting quality of life)? Are these implications consistent with the findings and conclusions of the paper?: not clearly

6. Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: yes

审稿人2:
Comments:
1: paper 7, line 7, e is equivalent contacting time, should be t.
2: please clarify the relation of the impact model with the experimental data, and the equation 10 and 11.

Additional Questions:
1. Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: normal

2. Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any significant work ignored?: normal

3. Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: normal

4. Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: Results are generally clear and right, while, there is no close tie between the experimental data and the proposed model.

5. Implications for research, practice and/or society: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for research, practice and/or society? Does the paper bridge the gap between theory and practice? How can the research be used in practice (economic and commercial impact), in teaching, to influence public policy, in research (contributing to the body of knowledge)? What is the impact upon society (influencing public attitudes, affecting quality of life)? Are these implications consistent with the findings and conclusions of the paper?: The generality is not enough.

6. Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: Readability is good.



审稿人只提了意见,没说别的,是不是选择了拒稿?第一个审稿人还说了interesting,第二个直接就两句话。。。
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

Chemwpa

铁杆木虫 (著名写手)

★ ★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
book2005593: 金币+1, 鼓励交流~ 2015-06-24 22:06:03
I consider that the work needs to be taken further before it will be ready for publication in our journal.
明确要求做进一步实验和研究,才能重新投寄。
现在情况下,基本没希望被接收发表。
2楼2015-06-24 19:15:22
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

lishidang

木虫 (正式写手)

★ ★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
book2005593: 金币+1, 鼓励交流~ 2015-06-24 22:06:13
看了下审稿意见,好好按照审稿专家的意见进行认真的回复,还是很有希望的,另外看了下后面的评分结果也是很不错的,所以楼主加油哈
3楼2015-06-24 21:13:15
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 yuheyang0919 的主题更新
普通表情 高级回复(可上传附件)
最具人气热帖推荐 [查看全部] 作者 回/看 最后发表
[基金申请] 听说今年没有c才能上会 +13 djdhhdhh 2024-07-12 18/900 2024-07-12 20:16 by djdhhdhh
[基金申请] 各学部会评时间已公布 +3 zhailichao 2024-07-12 3/150 2024-07-12 19:22 by 6543yes
[基金申请] 3A1B1C确认未上会 +38 jewin5215212 2024-07-12 48/2400 2024-07-12 17:55 by 6543yes
[硕博家园] 欧洲读博可以带配偶去 +12 毕生所学 2024-07-08 16/800 2024-07-12 16:09 by 张张@zz
[高分子] 对苯二甲酸的酯化问题 20+3 hp0228 2024-07-08 10/500 2024-07-12 11:24 by hp0228
[论文投稿] 论文投稿迟迟得不到回复(3个月了) +4 无。忌 2024-07-09 10/500 2024-07-12 11:01 by 17612199562
[论文投稿] 高校评价人才为什么只看paper? +21 意得辑_editage 2024-07-09 23/1150 2024-07-12 09:06 by Xiaolin81
[有机交流] 油脂类产品脱色问题? 50+4 萧萧征晴 2024-07-09 7/350 2024-07-12 08:25 by luolinfeng
[基金申请] 有没有A口流体力学的朋友 +12 不是233 2024-07-10 20/1000 2024-07-12 06:11 by kobe0107
[电化学] 聚合物固态电解质EIS测试 +3 htdnsdsg 2024-07-10 5/250 2024-07-12 05:07 by 当个小透明
[基金申请] 卸载小木虫,一个月假期后再见 +8 走了002 2024-07-11 8/400 2024-07-12 02:34 by 凌绝顶
[论文投稿] 被退稿了还能再重投吗 +6 想毕业的QWO 2024-07-10 7/350 2024-07-11 17:53 by 214357222
[博后之家] 年龄超35,还有机会去学校做博后吗 +14 ccy001122 2024-07-10 26/1300 2024-07-11 15:25 by 侠盗高飞x
[有机交流] 重氮化 5+3 wang292419 2024-07-10 3/150 2024-07-11 10:08 by luolinfeng
[论文投稿] 求大家帮忙看一下,主编是什么意思,是修改还是拒稿 5+9 Omnissiah 2024-07-09 26/1300 2024-07-11 08:04 by bobvan
[硕博家园] 老板叫硕博生写本子写项目书是普遍现象吗 +13 热忱12 2024-07-06 13/650 2024-07-11 08:02 by 投必得科研顾问
[基金申请] 国青还能中吗? +13 mengaiyy 2024-07-09 20/1000 2024-07-10 22:31 by mengaiyy
[基金申请] 化学B01青年基金已经会评完了,有知道今年B01青年基金的上会标准吗? +6 salmon95 2024-07-06 9/450 2024-07-09 08:55 by salmon95
[基金申请] 请问生命口面上哪天评啊 +7 残月锁漪 2024-07-06 10/500 2024-07-07 20:37 by 残月锁漪
[基金申请] NSFC上会后的淘汰率是多少 +9 高大圣 2024-07-06 11/550 2024-07-06 17:55 by 豆小河
信息提示
请填处理意见