24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 2167  |  回复: 8
【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题,作者llzzxx1983将赠送您 3 个金币

llzzxx1983

木虫 (正式写手)

[求助] 审稿人这些意见怎么回复 ?已有3人参与

本人投了 ELSEVIER 上的一篇文章,意见大修,编辑要我逐条回复,其它的修改好办,可是其中一个审稿人的意见如下,这怎么回复啊,请各位大神指教,谢谢!
Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1:
1. Is this an engineering contribution?
A. Partially yes.
2. Is it significant enough to warrant publication in FED?
A. Partially yes.
3. Does it adequately acknowledge earlier work in the field?
A. No. The advanced points are not clear compared with the ref 1 and 2 in this paper.
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

materix

铜虫 (小有名气)

建议如此回复:Reviewer #1:
[Reviewer]1. Is this an engineering contribution?
A. Partially yes.
[Author] I am sorry for not being able to highlight the engineering background and the contribution of this manuscript in the early version. In the revised version, I have added more explanations/descriptions to the engineering impact of this work.
[Reviewer]2. Is it significant enough to warrant publication in FED?
A. Partially yes.
[Author] Thanks again to the reviewer on suggesting to properly address the significance of the work. As you'll see, in the revised version, I added ... and .. to better emphasize the importance of this work
[Reviewer]3. Does it adequately acknowledge earlier work in the field?
A. No. The advanced points are not clear compared with the ref 1 and 2 in this paper
[Author] Again,thanks for pointing out the insufficiency of the interptetation. Now I have .... in the revised version.
总之,你不能拗他,要顺毛驴。他说的东西,如非原则性的结论,你都自我归罪于语言表达有待改进,并且在修改稿中都做了相应提高。改多少是你的事,不改的话就等于对他说:你的话都是屁话。他能高兴吗
2楼2015-11-24 01:08:14
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

mmctgao

金虫 (正式写手)

3楼2015-11-24 01:10:16
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

15929731947

新虫 (著名写手)

引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by materix at 2015-11-24 01:08:14
建议如此回复:Reviewer #1:
1. Is this an engineering contribution?
A. Partially yes.
I am sorry for not being able to highlight the engineering background and the contribution of this manuscript ...

好厉害

发自小木虫IOS客户端
4楼2015-11-24 07:03:05
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

z050510

木虫 (小有名气)

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
自私的猫1988: 应助指数-1, 无效应助 2015-11-25 03:18:18
引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by materix at 2015-11-24 01:08:14
建议如此回复:Reviewer #1:
1. Is this an engineering contribution?
A. Partially yes.
I am sorry for not being able to highlight the engineering background and the contribution of this manuscript ...

嗯,不错的回复,点赞

发自小木虫IOS客户端
5楼2015-11-24 07:51:32
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

chinkashyuu

木虫 (著名写手)

Prof.

你说我行,就算全世界说我不行,我也不在乎!
6楼2015-11-24 08:01:42
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

zjh93Andy

金虫 (正式写手)

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
llzzxx1983(自私的猫1988代发): 金币+5 2015-11-25 03:18:45
这个是编辑部让审稿人对你文章的新颖性等方面给予的评价,编辑参考拒稿或者修稿部分依据,不需要你回复

发自小木虫IOS客户端
7楼2015-11-24 12:13:04
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

tony8072shz

铜虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
llzzxx1983(自私的猫1988代发): 金币+2, 礼貌性回复都不用 2015-11-25 03:19:17
这个是审稿人的评价,不用回复的!只要礼貌的感谢一下!

[ 发自手机版 https://muchong.com/3g ]
8楼2015-11-24 14:34:57
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

自私的猫1988

荣誉版主 (文坛精英)

优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主优秀版主

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by materix at 2015-11-24 01:08:14
建议如此回复:Reviewer #1:
1. Is this an engineering contribution?
A. Partially yes.
I am sorry for not being able to highlight the engineering background and the contribution of this manuscript ...

7楼8楼都说的很清楚了,我在再补充一下,这是几个问题是审稿人在审稿时固定回答的问题,就是每篇文章都会有的评价指标性的问题
完全不用回复!!!
9楼2015-11-25 03:23:10
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 llzzxx1983 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