optics express兩個審稿人 均建議大修，但第一個審稿人言辭比較激烈，認(rèn)為我的文章創(chuàng)新型不足，但是我的文章的創(chuàng)新點跟他提到的創(chuàng)新點不太一樣，可能是文章撰寫時側(cè)重點出現(xiàn)了問題。第二個審稿人是業(yè)內(nèi)小同行，提了幾個增加計算的問題

大修相應(yīng)的增加了實驗計算，最后第一個審稿人還是拒了，第二個審稿人同意接受。編輯還是給拒絕了

I regret to inform you that your revised manuscript does not suitably address the reviewers’ concerns. Therefore I cannot accept your manuscript in its present form for publication in Optics Express. The comments from re-review are included below.

It is the policy of Optics Express to allow only one revision cycle, so any resubmission of this manuscript in revised form will be treated as a new manuscript and given a new submission date.  The Journal’s editorial board discourages resubmission of an inadequately revised manuscript.  Such papers will generally be rejected without being sent again for peer review.

想修改下摘要 介紹 題目更加凸顯自己的創(chuàng)新點重新投，不知道有沒有機(jī)會。各位有沒有oe重投的經(jīng)驗 返回小木蟲查看更多