| 查看: 3985 | 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
上海工程技术大学张培磊教授团队招收博士生
已经有3人回复
上海工程技术大学【激光智能制造】课题组招收硕士
已经有5人回复
求助院士们,这个如何合成呀
已经有4人回复
临港实验室与上科大联培博士招生1名
已经有9人回复
想换工作。大多数高校都是 评职称时 认可5年内在原单位取得的成果吗?
已经有7人回复
需要合成515-64-0,50g,能接单的留言
已经有4人回复
自荐读博
已经有4人回复
写了一篇“相变储能技术在冷库中应用”的论文,论文内容以实验为主,投什么期刊合适?
已经有6人回复
带资进组求博导收留
已经有10人回复
最近几年招的学生写论文不引自己组发的文章
已经有11人回复
» 抢金币啦!回帖就可以得到:
推荐给英语教学者的一本单词书《金鱼单词讲义:从26个拉丁字母到106万个英语单词》
+3/834
【宁德时代招聘】AI 物理学家
+1/170
好用的黑科技重组蛋白和生长因子
+1/98
Analytical Science Advances 持续征稿中
+1/81
经济学博士(金融方向)招生,211重点大学,2026年9月入学,申请-考核制。
+1/78
天津大学化学系吴立朋课题组申请考核制博士招生/博后招聘
+1/77
浙江师范大学申利国教授招聘博士后研究人员
+1/30
SCI,计算机相关可以写
+1/25
SCI,计算机相关可以写
+1/23
2026年中科院化学所优青 程靓团队招收有机化学、生物化学背景的博士研究生
+1/13
天津大学化学系吴立朋课题组申请考核制博士招生/博后招聘
+1/10
肿瘤免疫课题组招聘 博后
+1/8
天津大学化学系吴立朋课题组申请考核制博士招生/博后招聘
+1/7
微生物药物合成生物学方向---上海师范大学2026年博士研究生招生
+1/6
经济学博士(金融方向)招生,211重点大学,2026年9月入学,申请-考核制。
+1/4
山东大学集成电路学院博士招生1名
+1/2
河南师范大学植物生殖生物学科研团队博士招聘
+1/1
北京师范大学与企业联合招聘博士后、全职、兼职人员
+1/1
中科院苏州医工所单细胞分析技术中心招聘公告(细胞分选、图像识别、流式应用方向)
+1/1
北京理工大学原子团簇团队博士后招聘公告(长期有效)
+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: 2555220
- 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