| 5 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 952 | 回復(fù): 10 | |||
| 當(dāng)前只顯示滿足指定條件的回帖,點(diǎn)擊這里查看本話題的所有回帖 | |||
[交流]
一審意見回來,有點(diǎn)吃不準(zhǔn),大家?guī)兔纯矗?
|
|||
|
三個(gè)審稿意見,兩個(gè)比較正面,最后一個(gè)有點(diǎn)吃不準(zhǔn)。編輯給了major revision。 reviewer 1: ...Overall, this is a very interesting and well executed paper. I have some questions and some suggestions for improvement, where the latter ones refer mainly to structure, motivation and readability. As the model is novel and, in my view, adds something important to the literature, the paper could make a valuable contribution to XXXX after a careful revision.... reviewer 1列了七八條意見,但都不太難回答。 reviewer 2: ...To the best of my knowledge, the authors are right that they are the first to carefully analyze a tractable equilibrium model with both belief heterogeneity and prospect-theory preferences. Theorems 1 and 2 are interesting, and so is the empirical exercise in section 4. As explained by the authors, prediction markets constitute a growing toolbox for aggregating probability forecasts. The theoretical literature discussed by the authors has aimed to improve on this toolbox, in part by better understanding the actual behavior of market participants. The present article is a very good contribution to this theoretical literature.... reviewer 2列了18條修改意見,但大部分都是指出一些typo外加一些語言敘述上的建議,總體也還好。 reviewer 3: This paper is interesting and engaging to read. ...The model and market equilibrium appear to be sound and are well-explained. Modelling prospect theory is not my area of expertise but the authors do a good job at explaining this to the non-expert. The paper is technical in nature and appears to be well-executed. I do have a number of substance concerns that that authors might consider. Each of these is discussed further below. The most concerning is whether the FLB or rFLB bias is actually the appropriate lens to empirically test a binary (win/lose or home/away) outcome. In my mind, this is not what the FLB or rFLB is about. ... 我感覺reviewer 3估計(jì)對(duì)這個(gè)topic不是太了解,他對(duì)我們的模型的適用性和一些基礎(chǔ)假設(shè)提出了疑問,但實(shí)際上這些假設(shè)在領(lǐng)域內(nèi)算是比較常見的做法。前兩位審稿人明顯對(duì)這個(gè)topic比較了解,因此對(duì)這些假設(shè)沒有提出質(zhì)疑。這種情況下如果我引一些領(lǐng)域內(nèi)的相關(guān)文獻(xiàn)來證明假設(shè)的合理性,是否有機(jī)會(huì)扭轉(zhuǎn)reviewer 3的印象? |
» 搶金幣啦!回帖就可以得到:
+5/1690
+1/88
+1/82
+1/72
+2/66
+1/48
+1/46
+2/46
+2/36
+1/35
+1/33
+1/29
+1/15
+1/8
+1/8
+1/6
+1/3
+1/2
+1/2
+1/1
鐵桿木蟲 (知名作家)
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 環(huán)境學(xué)碩288求調(diào)劑 +6 | 皮皮皮123456 2026-03-22 | 6/300 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 384求調(diào)劑 +3 | 子系博 2026-03-22 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 材料求調(diào)劑 +5 | @taotao 2026-03-21 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研]
|
Grand777 2026-03-21 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 0703化學(xué)調(diào)劑 +4 | 妮妮ninicgb 2026-03-21 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿深大,0703化學(xué),總分302,求調(diào)劑 +4 | 七月-七七 2026-03-21 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 材料 271求調(diào)劑 +5 | 展信悅_ 2026-03-21 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 296求調(diào)劑 +4 | www_q 2026-03-20 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 277材料科學(xué)與工程080500求調(diào)劑 +6 | 自由煎餅果子 2026-03-16 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 299求調(diào)劑 +5 | shxchem 2026-03-20 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 求調(diào)劑 +6 | Mqqqqqq 2026-03-19 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 303求調(diào)劑 +5 | 睿08 2026-03-17 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿中國(guó)石油大學(xué)(華東) 本科齊魯工業(yè)大學(xué) +3 | 石能偉 2026-03-17 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 296求調(diào)劑 +6 | www_q 2026-03-18 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 317求調(diào)劑 +5 | 申子申申 2026-03-19 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考研]
|
不想起名字112 2026-03-19 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 材料專碩306英一數(shù)二 +10 | z1z2z3879 2026-03-16 | 13/650 |
|
|
[考研] 275求調(diào)劑 +4 | 太陽花天天開心 2026-03-16 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 考研調(diào)劑 +3 | 淇ya_~ 2026-03-17 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研]
|
zhouzhen654 2026-03-16 | 3/150 |
|