| 10 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 2134 | 回復(fù): 9 | |||
thinking木蟲 (正式寫手)
|
[交流]
編輯發(fā)錯審稿意見,但文章無進(jìn)展,如何處理 已有5人參與
|
| 一審回來,期刊給的意見是小修,其中A評價很高,建議發(fā)表,B評價一般,提出了很多問題,但是仔細(xì)一看,B的意見根本不是我文章的,然后寫信說明,主編向本人致歉,并將正確審稿意見發(fā)給我,而此意見評價很低,建議拒掉。一般這種情況,編輯應(yīng)該會找第三人審稿,因此,我寫信問編輯,說期刊的意見是什么,直接拒、大修還是第三人審?不過一直沒有回信,從網(wǎng)上查詢文章狀態(tài)與一審結(jié)果一模一樣(包括錯誤的意見),請教下大家,這種情況是什么意思,文章基本沒戲了?有沒有必要再寫封信問下。 |
至尊木蟲 (文壇精英)
IEEE雜志與會議專家
木蟲 (著名寫手)

木蟲 (正式寫手)
至尊木蟲 (文壇精英)
IEEE雜志與會議專家
|
比這里的第一個審稿人的意見還嚴(yán)重?那就發(fā)出來看看! http://www.gaoyang168.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=2387663 |
木蟲 (正式寫手)
|
This paper describes numerical results obtained by the authors of the XXX. This is an extensively studied problem both numerically and experimentally. The difficulty for the authors in this case is to bring something new or innovative to our understanding of the problem. Unfortunately, the manuscript as well as the presented research fails to do so. Despite the fact that the authors have gone through English edition of their manuscript, important parts of the papers are very poorly written and it is sometimes quite difficult to understand the points made and the authors appear to make vague, imprecise, qualitative comments to describe the method and the already known results, which do not teach the reader anything new about the phenomena. The manuscript describes numerical results obtained a commercial code. The assumptions of the code, the equations it solves, its limits of application, its validity for the problem at hand, gridding used, convergence, and so on, are not addressed or described in any fashion. The authors instead just describe results obtained with a code they have not developed, describe unimportant minute details and discuss already known results from either the references cited by the manuscript authors or by other published studies (e.g. see additional references at the end of this review). The following are some additional detailed comments: (以下有7條具體內(nèi)容,前六條都是針對文中內(nèi)容的,比較好回答,但最后一條說結(jié)論很早就知道了,其實還是有差異的...) In conclusion, I unfortunately did not learn anything reading this manuscript and cannot therefore recommend it to the permanent literature. I therefore recommend rejection. |
至尊木蟲 (文壇精英)
IEEE雜志與會議專家
|
結(jié)論主要還是語言問題引起的,好好改吧。 “parts of the papers are very poorly written and it is sometimes quite difficult to understand the points made and the authors appear to make vague, imprecise, qualitative comments to describe the method and the already known results, which do not teach the reader anything new about the phenomena. ” |
木蟲 (正式寫手)
木蟲 (知名作家)
木蟲 (小有名氣)
| 10 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[碩博家園] 湖北工業(yè)大學(xué) 生命科學(xué)與健康學(xué)院-課題組招收2026級食品/生物方向碩士 +3 | 1喜春8 2026-03-17 | 5/250 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 308求調(diào)劑 +4 | 是Lupa啊 2026-03-16 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 312求調(diào)劑 +4 | 陌宸希 2026-03-16 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 【0856】化學(xué)工程(085602)313 分,本科學(xué)科評估A類院;瘜W(xué)工程與工藝,誠求調(diào)劑 +7 | 小劉快快上岸 2026-03-11 | 8/400 |
|
|
[基金申請] 被我言中:新模板不強(qiáng)調(diào)格式了,假專家開始管格式了 +3 | beefly 2026-03-14 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿,福州大學(xué)材料專碩339分求調(diào)劑 +3 | 木子momo青爭 2026-03-15 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 283求調(diào)劑 +3 | 聽風(fēng)就是雨; 2026-03-16 | 3/150 |
|
|
[基金申請] 國自科面上基金字體 +6 | iwuli 2026-03-12 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 304求調(diào)劑 +3 | 曼殊2266 2026-03-14 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 0703化學(xué)調(diào)劑 290分有科研經(jīng)歷,論文在投 +7 | 膩膩gk 2026-03-14 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 288求調(diào)劑 +4 | 奇點0314 2026-03-14 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 中科大材料與化工319求調(diào)劑 +3 | 孟鑫材料 2026-03-14 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 289求調(diào)劑 +4 | 這么名字咋樣 2026-03-14 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 材料與化工(0856)304求B區(qū)調(diào)劑 +6 | 邱gl 2026-03-12 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 311求調(diào)劑 +3 | 冬十三 2026-03-13 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿211化學(xué)學(xué)碩310分求調(diào)劑 +8 | 努力奮斗112 2026-03-12 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考研] 求調(diào)劑 +3 | 程雨杭 2026-03-12 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 270求調(diào)劑 085600材料與化工專碩 +3 | YXCT 2026-03-11 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 081200-11408-276學(xué)碩求調(diào)劑 +3 | 崔wj 2026-03-12 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 大連大學(xué)化學(xué)專業(yè)研究生調(diào)劑 +3 | 琪久. 2026-03-10 | 8/400 |
|