| 查看: 4783 | 回复: 26 | |||
[交流]
Building and Environment投了一篇,现在是under review
|
|||
|
9月10日在Building and Environment上投稿一篇,9月28日给了审稿意见,状态变为Revise。两个审稿人,总体评价觉得文章有一定的意思,但存在一些问题:第一个审稿人提的都是一些肤浅一点的意见,如某些词说法不够专业,某些词语用法错误等,都按照他的意见进行了修改。另外一个审稿人提的比较深入,说我的文章缺乏逻辑性,如我说文章的研究意义,但没有引用相应的文献,解释某个公式的意思,部分内容重复,要求删除。。。。10月10日进行了修改和解释,已经提交,现在状态有变成了Under Review。 问题有二: 1、之前的Revise指的是大修还是小修?编辑倾向于接收还是再看看? 2、现在的under review是编辑在审,以及让原审稿人看我做的修改和回复的意见?还是编辑又重新选择了审稿人,又送审了? 希望有经验的给点建议!谢谢! |
» 猜你喜欢
浙江师范大学是怎么坑我的
已经有7人回复
求教各位大神:2026教育部人文社科青年基金项目何时公示呀?
已经有6人回复
面上有专家说实验设备不是我们单位的
已经有8人回复
科研求助
已经有4人回复
博士去二本高校当辅导员,如何调整心态?
已经有11人回复
江苏省自然基金 什么时候出结果
已经有6人回复
闲聊
已经有3人回复
» 抢金币啦!回帖就可以得到:
项目结题验收,希望一切顺利
+1/985
南京大学能源与资源学院景旭东院士团队博士后招聘公告(南京大学苏州校区)
+2/248
急招科研助理/博士后
+2/164
211诚招材化相关专业硕士、博士、博后(长期有效)推免-保研-调剂-申博
+1/47
山东征女友,坐标济南
+1/39
中国科大-合肥国家实验室冷原子量子网络团队招聘启事
+2/38
中科院西北研究院招收遥感、地信相关专业联培研究生及科研助理!
+1/27
深圳大学应用技术学院招聘凝聚态物理博士后
+1/19
深圳大学2027级光电信息工程/物理学研究生推免
+1/17
哈工大(深圳)招收工程热物理专业2027入学博士生
+1/12
广东省智能院与澳门大学、澳门科技大学、澳理工联合培养博士招生
+1/10
招聘材料计算,分子动力学模拟相关讲师
+1/3
合肥工业大学许婷婷老师招收2027年入学博士研究生,有机/高分子合成背景
+1/2
上海交大刘苏萌课题组招收集成电路专项硕士生(ALD前驱体方向,头部企业联培)
+1/2
Paris Saclay university, Dallerac教授团队招收2027CSC–Saclay合作奖学金博士生
+1/2
神经肽 SP 通过肠道菌群及代谢物肌醇改善结肠炎及其伴随焦虑样行为
+1/1
自然资源部第二海洋研究所招聘博士后,年薪30W+
+1/1
中国科学院兰州化学物理研究所青岛基地王楠楠课题组诚招联合培养硕士一名
+1/1
化学生物学与肿瘤药物研发博士后 / 研究助理招聘 香港城市大学
+1/1
钯膜纯化设备,如何匹配不同科研量级
+1/1
5楼2015-10-13 00:34:12
23楼2015-10-29 20:12:34
|
Title: Numerical study************************* Building and Environment Original Research Paper Dear Prof. Fe**&*7, This message is to acknowledge that we have received your revised manuscript for reconsideration for publication in Building and Environment. You may check the status of your manuscript by logging into the Elsevier Editorial System as an author at https://ees.elsevier.com/bae/. Thank you for submitting your work to Building and Environment. Kind regards, Elsevier Editorial System Building and Environment 邮件收到的回执! |
3楼2015-10-11 13:06:47
4楼2015-10-11 13:08:25
6楼2015-10-13 09:21:45
7楼2015-10-15 09:36:35
8楼2015-10-16 10:26:02
9楼2015-10-19 19:05:11
10楼2015-10-21 00:57:00
nono2009
超级版主 (文学泰斗)
-

专家经验: +21105 - 应助: 28684 (院士)
- 贵宾: 513.911
- 金币: 2555230
- 帖子: 1602255
- 在线: 65200.9小时
- 虫号: 827383
11楼2015-10-21 03:26:32
13楼2015-10-21 12:47:25
|
今天还是没有回复,已经11天了!一审也就20天,一休就然11天了还没有结果? 一审的两个审稿人的总评如下: 1)It is interesting to investigate the i#¥#%@¥%. This paper provides very detailed #¥%¥# results and the work is meaningful. However, the paper was not written in a logical and clear way. So I have the following comments: 2)Your attempt to provide a new aspect of looking into the intriguing #¥@#%¥# by applying the theory of @#!@#¥ is admirable! The detailed analysis on the temporal and spatial data collected was also noted. However, @#¥#¥@5 个人感觉两个审稿人给的评价还是不错的! |
14楼2015-10-21 12:51:13
15楼2015-10-21 12:58:51
18楼2015-10-22 16:50:54
19楼2015-10-23 18:59:26
20楼2015-10-25 12:29:30
|
等来了一个这结果:不太明白。 Thank you for submitting the revised version of above-mentioned manuscript. The second-round review process is now complete. At least one of the reviewers recommended that you should further revise your paper to address the review comments. I invite you to revise and resubmit your manuscript by carefully addressing the issues raised in the comments. Please check if there are additional comments downloadable from Elsevier Editorial System (EES) not included in this email. ( ) If the parenthesis is checked, the reviewer requested again a major revision. Since this could be the last chance for you to make the manuscript acceptable, you should make extra effort to address the reviewer's concern. When revising your manuscript, please also: a) outline each change made (point by point) as raised in the reviewer comments or provide a suitable rebuttal to each reviewer comment not addressed, b) highlight or "track" the changes you made in the revision, and c) submit a clean revision that is suitable for production in case no more revision is needed. Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: The manuscript is in better shape now. However, I still not see the last sentence of the conclusion part "probably played a more important role in determining the spread of#¥#%#¥." The author used the word "probably" and it is hard for me to see this conclusion from the results in this paper. 两个审稿人,这是第一个审稿人之前提了14个非常犀利的问题,这次二审只提了这一句 ,但确“the reviewer requested again a major revision”,哎不知道什么意思呀。改一下能被接收吗?!!!!!!! |
21楼2015-10-25 14:21:20
22楼2015-10-29 14:21:32
25楼2016-07-21 15:26:59
26楼2020-03-04 11:54:12
简单回复
zhou_yg2楼
2015-10-11 12:44
回复



whb2112楼
2015-10-21 06:08
回复
祝福 发自小木虫IOS客户端
郑明俊16楼
2015-10-21 13:04
回复
ycw12(金币+2): 谢谢参与
好 发自小木虫Android客户端
cidily17楼
2015-10-21 13:16
回复
ycw12(金币+1): 谢谢参与
tianxia090224楼
2015-10-29 20:24
回复
tangaibing27楼
2020-03-04 22:49
回复









回复此楼