24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
查看: 4165  |  回复: 27
【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题,作者yizhousan将赠送您 17 个金币

yizhousan

木虫 (小有名气)

[求助] 投CL一审Rejected-Resubmission allowed, 求教从审稿意见来看重投录用概率如何已有17人参与

Reviewer: 1

Comments to the Author
- The paper investigates the noise whitening problem in AF relay protocol. In general the paper is well written and easy to follow. The main contribution in this paper is the application of the widely known whitening technique to AF system.  As example, some papers [1,2] studied this problem but with different  angles and formulation. The authors need to explain the difference and highlight his contribution clearly.   
[1] Fan-Shuo Tseng; Min-Yao Chang; Wen-Rong Wu, "Joint Tomlinson–Harashima Source and Linear Relay Precoder Design in Amplify-and-Forward MIMO Relay Systems via MMSE Criterion," Vehicular Technology, IEEE Transactions on , vol.60, no.4, pp.1687,1698, May 2011
[2] Jiayi Zhang; Lie-Liang Yang; Hanzo, L., "Power-Efficient Opportunistic Amplify-and-Forward Single-Relay Aided Multi-User SC-FDMA Uplink," Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC 2010-Spring), 2010 IEEE 71st , vol., no., pp.1,5, 16-19 May 2010
- In the other hand the author must also cite and discuss the non-coherent modulations AF in his paper where such system can work without NW and without any channel estimator at the receiver side [3, 4]
[3 ]Farhadi, G.; Beaulieu, N.C., "A Low Complexity Receiver for Noncoherent Amplify-and-Forward Cooperative Systems," Communications, IEEE Transactions on , vol.58, no.9, pp.2499,2504, September 2010 doi: 10.1109/TCOMM.2010.072710.090036
[4] Kaddoum, G.; Parzysz, F.; Shokraneh, F., "Low-complexity amplify-and-forward relaying protocol for non-coherent chaos-based communication system," Communications, IET , vol.8, no.13, pp.2281,2289, September 5 2014
- Finally,  by looking carefully to Fig 4 we can see that the improvement is marginal, can the author explain this results by taking into account the additional complexity added to the system compared to the on in reference  [5] of the paper
- Minor comments:
Some typos must be checked
After your equations you need to put comma or point
Your reference list must be cheeked to follow the IEEE format.
In my opinion the paper can be considered after revision



Reviewer: 2

Comments to the Author
The authors have tried to introduce an interesting noise whitening scheme applicable to AF relay systems. Having said so, the reviewer would like to share the following.

1. There are good number of grammatical errors and few typos. For instance, missing a ',' prior to 'and', burthen must be burden, page 2/9, lines 45-47 must be rephrased, if a 'which' is not preceded by a ',' then it must be a 'that', words starting with a vowel must be preceded with a 'an' and not 'a', and all the equations must end either with a ',' or '.'.
2. Isnt the assumption on perfect synchronization a very strong assumption? Is it really possible to this perfection?
3. The figures must have the Grid ON.
4. The power delay profiles are exponentially decaying with exp(-0.001l). Please cite some proper reference for this OR explain further.
5. The references must follow IEEE format.
6. The authors must share exactly where does the novelty stand in this work to be acceptable in IEEE Comms Letters. Is the presented work enough quantification to qualify publication in IEEE Comms Letters?

Based on the above, the reviewer will be happy to review the revised version.

Reviewer: 3

Comments to the Author
In this paper, the authors have proposed a noise whitening scheme in order to improve the performance of receivers in the amplify-and-forward relay systems. The authors have shown that the receiver with the noise whitening processing results in better estimation and detection performance than the original one at medium to high SNR.

However, the authors should make following changes in the paper in order to improve the quality of the paper. Specifically, the authors should explain that why the noise whitening receiver performance is worse than the original receiver. Moreover, the authors should provide more references about previous work and compare their proposed scheme with existing work.

请问重投录用概率如何,如果重投修改时需要注意哪些问题。非常感谢各位大牛的帮助!
回复此楼
弘毅致远!
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
回帖支持 ( 显示支持度最高的前 50 名 )

zbking

铁杆木虫 (正式写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
yizhousan: 金币+5 2015-07-15 19:55:51
CL的拒绝重投相当于大修,按照审稿人的意见认真修改,希望还是挺大的、祝好运。。。
2楼2015-07-15 19:17:05
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

zbking

铁杆木虫 (正式写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
yizhousan: 金币+5, ★★★很有帮助 2015-07-15 19:48:45
楼主这个审稿意见感觉还是不错的啊,没有什么特别棘手的问题,主要是对比突出文章的贡献,同时注意相关文献、以及基本格式等,感觉还是比较有戏的~~~楼主这篇一审时间何如。。。
3楼2015-07-15 19:23:27
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

thma

铜虫 (小有名气)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
yizhousan: 金币+3, 有帮助, 原来是这样啊 2015-07-19 17:12:29
重投,对于杂志来说,最后的显示的投稿和录用之间的时间很短,给人感觉该杂志多高效呀。
xx
16楼2015-07-18 06:07:34
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

li-34-56

新虫 (小有名气)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
yizhousan: 金币+5, ★★★很有帮助 2015-07-15 19:49:07
yizhousan: 金币+5 2015-07-15 20:14:08
楼主的格式和语法问题较多,给审稿人很不好的印象,修改过程要特别注意不要再出现类似的问题。不过,审稿人都建议修改,希望看到你的修改稿,只要逐条认真修改,概率应该很大。
材料加工工程
4楼2015-07-15 19:24:34
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

青虫healer

金虫 (小有名气)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
yizhousan: 金币+5, 有帮助 2015-07-16 22:42:10
现在重投越来越流行了,好好修改,就相当于大修,加油~

[ 发自小木虫客户端 ]
8楼2015-07-16 19:40:22
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
普通回帖

yizhousan

木虫 (小有名气)

引用回帖:
3楼: Originally posted by zbking at 2015-07-15 19:23:27
楼主这个审稿意见感觉还是不错的啊,没有什么特别棘手的问题,主要是对比突出文章的贡献,同时注意相关文献、以及基本格式等,感觉还是比较有戏的~~~楼主这篇一审时间何如。。。

距离投稿一个月整
弘毅致远!
5楼2015-07-15 19:47:38
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

adnano

金虫 (小有名气)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
yizhousan: 金币+5, 有帮助 2015-07-16 06:44:36
看审稿意见重投概率挺大的。

[ 发自小木虫客户端 ]
6楼2015-07-16 00:38:45
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

beanli

木虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
yizhousan: 金币+5, 有帮助 2015-07-16 22:42:02
希望很大,抓紧修改吧。
7楼2015-07-16 18:16:22
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

CCTiger

金虫 (初入文坛)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
yizhousan: 金币+10, ★★★很有帮助 2015-07-19 17:08:51
我去年重投后中了一篇,目前还有 一篇重投在审。好好修改,重投录用概率挺大的。但也绝不能大意,我身边也有两个重投后被拒的例子,原因基本上都是没有处理好审稿人意见。加油吧~
9楼2015-07-17 00:04:44
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

匿名

本帖仅楼主可见
10楼2015-07-17 07:57:44
已阅   申请SEPI   回复此楼   编辑   查看我的主页
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 yizhousan 的主题更新
不应助 确定回帖应助 (注意:应助才可能被奖励,但不允许灌水,必须填写15个字符以上)
信息提示
请填处理意见