24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 1590  |  回复: 6

johnd1

新虫 (初入文坛)

[交流] 新人第一次给AIP ADVANCES 投稿,请各位虫友和大牛帮忙看看这意见还有戏没戏已有4人参与

小弟今年10月投稿JAP,编辑建议转投到AIP ADVANCES,第一次审稿后意见如下:
Reviewer Comments:
Reviewer #1 Evaluations:
RECOMMENDATION: Publish with mandatory revision (minor)
Original Paper required: Yes
Well Organized and Clear required : Yes
Free From Errors required : No
Conclusions Supported required : Yes
Satisfactory English required : Yes
Appropriate Title required : Yes
Good Abstract required : Yes
Clear Figures required : No
Adequate References required : No

AIP Advances is an appropriate journal for this paper, because this paper addressed the study of thermal and electrical characteristics of the XXX.
Although this work seems very interesting, several points need be addressed to increase the strength of the paper:
1. The authors didn't explain well how good the performance of their XXX is compared with those in the previous studies, and what are their XXX's advantages over those reported in the literatures. The ingenuity and the impact of the paper are doubtful.
2. The theoretical part of the manuscript is not written in a rigorous way. The authors didn't explain the meanings of each symbol in the equations. They also didn't describe how the simulations in section 2.3 and 3 were done, including the equations they used, the parameter values they chose, the boundary conditions they applied, and even a clear computational geometry.
3. The qualities of images are all very low. I suggest that the authors redraw those figures and improve the image quality.
请各位大牛虫友帮忙看看,这篇文章是不是已经没救了,还是说仍然存留一线希望?
拜托大家!!!
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

pingcne

木虫 (正式写手)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
基本上接收了!只要按照要求改
2楼2015-12-17 15:57:16
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

宇智波衍

铜虫 (著名写手)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
问题不大,适合期刊……根据意见好好改,提交修改稿的时候,逐条回复审稿人,希望很大!

发自小木虫Android客户端
3楼2015-12-17 16:08:18
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

johnd1

新虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by pingcne at 2015-12-17 15:57:16
基本上接收了!只要按照要求改

大牛您好!请问一般面对“The authors didn't explain well how good the performance of their XXX is compared with those in the previous studies, and what are their XXX's advantages over those reported in the literatures. The ingenuity and the impact of the paper are doubtful.”这种问题有什么经验来回复呢?新人第一次投SCI,很多不懂,还希望大牛指教!
4楼2015-12-17 20:33:24
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

johnd1

新虫 (初入文坛)

顶一下,感谢楼上的虫友!
5楼2015-12-18 09:08:16
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

kqp1982

木虫 (著名写手)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
引用回帖:
4楼: Originally posted by johnd1 at 2015-12-17 20:33:24
大牛您好!请问一般面对“The authors didn't explain well how good the performance of their XXX is compared with those in the previous studies, and what are their XXX's advantages over those reported  ...

非大牛,但是针对这样的情况,其实就是多补充几个相关的文献,然后和文献的数据比较,你做的材料或者器件优势在哪里
6楼2015-12-18 13:40:40
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

Mtime1992

新虫 (小有名气)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
我想问一下,这个期刊怎么收费的

发自小木虫Android客户端
7楼2016-03-03 09:17:29
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 johnd1 的主题更新
普通表情 高级回复(可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见