| 查看: 2456 | 回復(fù): 15 | ||||
linsoklove金蟲 (著名寫手)
|
[求助]
各位幫我分析理解一下審稿意見(jiàn),讓我知道該怎么回答 已有4人參與
|
|
今天終于收到了審稿意見(jiàn),但是由于英文不太好,也由于太過(guò)于緊張了吧,現(xiàn)在一臉茫然。還希望各位幫我分析一下該如何回答。審稿意見(jiàn)如下: Comments from the editors and reviewers: -Reviewer 1 - Strengths: The problem shown in the manuscript is interesting and well defined. The solving method may be interesting for other researchers. The application of results may lead to increase heat transfer capabilities which is within the scope of the Journal. The CFD simulation is compared with some experimental results. Most of the model parameters are explained. Weaknesses: The main interest for readers would be the simulation method which is described, but some more details could be given such as mesh details (the picture is informative, but number of cells, cell and shape in all regions could be given explicitly). The comparison with the experiment is shown only for offset angle, is it possible to address also at least qualitatively the thickness of the layer? Maybe for one case only but some remarks could be important for other researchers. The minimal flow for sur wetting could be simulated using this method? There is a small mistyped number in Fig 3b experiment shall be 200 instead of 100. -Reviewer 2 - Dear Author, This is well-written article that does identify an important gap in xxxx. There has been a few researches on xxxx reported in open literature. However, the article would be significantly improved with the addition of more review of the xxxx. This is because the review of the literature is not thorough for study of xxxx; because the author only referred to two articles which were published in 2014 and 2007, which has a big gap almost 10 years. The author did not critically review xxxx in the Introduction. This helps to show that this parameter is important to characterize xxxx. The details of my comments and suggestions are attached with this reviewer comments. |
金蟲 (著名寫手)
金蟲 (著名寫手)
榮譽(yù)版主 (文壇精英)

榮譽(yù)版主 (文學(xué)泰斗)
還沒(méi)想好
![]() |
專家經(jīng)驗(yàn): +14 |
| 第一個(gè)審稿人的意見(jiàn)比較專業(yè)和具體,第二個(gè)審稿人的意見(jiàn)相對(duì)籠統(tǒng),主要針對(duì)引言,要求增加引用的文章數(shù)量。建議樓主貼出不懂的部分,以便進(jìn)行有針對(duì)性的回答。 |

金蟲 (正式寫手)
| 看意見(jiàn),只要是能把審稿人1給說(shuō)服了,問(wèn)題就不大,多和導(dǎo)師商量一下怎么從專業(yè)的角度回應(yīng)審稿人1。審稿人2給的意見(jiàn)很宏觀,個(gè)人感覺(jué)可能是你行文的問(wèn)題,沒(méi)有在introduction里把自己的創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)突出出來(lái),還有就是引用的文獻(xiàn)不夠,2的意見(jiàn)相對(duì)好改。全文改好后,建議最后完善下abstract,一陣見(jiàn)血地點(diǎn)出innovation,讓人能一下子抓到你的創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)。只要你努力去改了,審稿人和編輯會(huì)看到你的誠(chéng)意的,加油祝福! |

金蟲 (著名寫手)
金蟲 (著名寫手)
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 本科211總分289,08工學(xué)真心求調(diào)劑 +3 | utopiaE 2026-03-30 | 3/150 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 303求調(diào)劑 +7 | DLkz1314. 2026-03-30 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 291求調(diào)劑 +8 | Y-cap 2026-03-29 | 11/550 |
|
|
[考研] 環(huán)境工程 085701,267求調(diào)劑 +7 | minht 2026-03-29 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿南昌大學(xué)324求調(diào)劑 +9 | hanamiko 2026-03-27 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考研] 環(huán)境科學(xué)與工程334分求調(diào)劑 +6 | 王一一依依 2026-03-30 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考研] 085600,材料與化工321分求調(diào)劑 +10 | 大饞小子 2026-03-28 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 275求調(diào)劑 +15 | Micky11223 2026-03-25 | 20/1000 |
|
|
[考研] 316求調(diào)劑 +7 | 江辭666 2026-03-26 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 071000生物學(xué)求調(diào)劑,初試成績(jī)343 +7 | 小小甜面團(tuán) 2026-03-25 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研]
|
y7czhao 2026-03-26 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 調(diào)劑 +3 | 好好讀書。 2026-03-28 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 求調(diào)劑 +4 | 零八# 2026-03-27 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 化學(xué)調(diào)劑 +4 | 愛(ài)吃番茄的旭 2026-03-24 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 復(fù)試調(diào)劑,一志愿南農(nóng)083200食品科學(xué)與工程 +5 | XQTJZ 2026-03-26 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 求調(diào)劑 一志愿 本科 北科大 化學(xué) 343 +6 | 13831862839 2026-03-24 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿 南京郵電大學(xué) 288分 材料考研 求調(diào)劑 +3 | jl0720 2026-03-26 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 機(jī)械學(xué)碩總分317求調(diào)劑。。! +4 | Acaciad 2026-03-25 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 網(wǎng)絡(luò)空間安全0839招調(diào)劑 +4 | w320357296 2026-03-25 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 086003食品工程求調(diào)劑 +6 | 淼淼111 2026-03-24 | 6/300 |
|