| 5 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 1316 | 回復(fù): 4 | ||
zhou_jun木蟲 (小有名氣)
|
[求助]
請問這種審稿意見怎么回復(fù)?
|
|
從去年十月開始寫作,年底投稿,二月份收到審稿人意見: The article describes implementation and application of the *** parallel codes, and their input and output graphical infrastructure. The authors have been very successful in this large project. Their algorithms as described are well established in prior practice, as cited in the references. Other algorithms and methods, e.g. boundary conditions, and their strategy for dynamic load balancing, are not described. Results in several device contexts are verified by comparison to other codes. The development and verification of these codes is a creditable accomplishment in providing the authors with a powerful modeling tool. However this reviewer does not find new algorithms or methods, nor new physics or device results, in these manuscripts. Publication in *** is not recommended. 可以看出,審稿人先是肯定了我們的工作,并且評價還是可以,但最后還是由于沒有new algorithms or methods, new physics or device results而認(rèn)為不適合發(fā)表. 我們按照意見新增了一些內(nèi)容,主要就是審稿人提到的boundary conditions, and strategy for dynamic load balancing等詳細(xì)內(nèi)容. 結(jié)果審稿人二次審回意見還是抓住這一點不放: In comparison to the original manuscript, the changes found are mainly the discussion of boundary conditions and optimization of parallelization, via re-partitioning for load balancing. There is no evidence that they have advanced the state of that art. The main body of algorithms as described are well established in prior practice and documented in publications. This reviewer still does not find new physics or device results in this revision. In the development of these codes, the authors have assembled a good selection of algorithms and infrastructure to fit their computer facility and applications. They then carefully verify their codes by comparison with previous results. This is a systematic, laudable development of their modeling capability. But I believe the manuscript does not "contain significant new research contributions" (item 1 in "Publication Standards and Review Procedures). Publication in *** is not recommended. 這次我們雖然盡力充實和很多內(nèi)容,但審稿人還是認(rèn)為沒有創(chuàng)新點,即使后面肯定了我們的工作,但還是認(rèn)為不能發(fā)表. 編輯讓我們再次按照審稿意見修改,但我面對這樣一份意見,完全不知道如何下手,毫無頭緒.現(xiàn)在修回期限快到了,只好打算寫一份比較詳細(xì)的解釋說明來回復(fù)審稿人,希望能說服他. 雖然這樣希望不大,但事到如今只好背水一戰(zhàn)了. 請問大家在措辭上和內(nèi)容上怎么寫比較好? 本人經(jīng)驗有限,請各位蟲蟲多幫忙支支招啊! |

銀蟲 (正式寫手)

禁蟲 (著名寫手)
|
建議多看看文獻(xiàn),挖掘和歸納好自己論文的重新點,這個很重要. http://www.gaoyang168.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=3203353&fpage=2 |
銀蟲 (小有名氣)
銀蟲 (小有名氣)
| 5 | 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 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 323求調(diào)劑 +6 | 洼小桶 2026-03-18 | 6/300 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 352求調(diào)劑 +3 | 大米飯! 2026-03-22 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 291 求調(diào)劑 +3 | 化工2026屆畢業(yè)?/a> 2026-03-21 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 初試 317 +7 | 半拉月丙 2026-03-20 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 材料與化工(0856)304求B區(qū)調(diào)劑 +3 | 邱gl 2026-03-20 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 330求調(diào)劑0854 +3 | assdll 2026-03-21 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 材料學(xué)學(xué)碩080502 337求調(diào)劑-一志愿華中科技大學(xué) +4 | 順順順mr 2026-03-18 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 085601調(diào)劑 358分 +3 | zzzzggh 2026-03-20 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 296求調(diào)劑 +6 | www_q 2026-03-18 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 321求調(diào)劑 +9 | 何潤采123 2026-03-18 | 11/550 |
|
|
[考研] 330求調(diào)劑 +4 | 小材化本科 2026-03-18 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 0817 化學(xué)工程 299分求調(diào)劑 有科研經(jīng)歷 有二區(qū)文章 +22 | rare12345 2026-03-18 | 22/1100 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿南理工085701環(huán)境302求調(diào)劑院校 +3 | 葵梓衛(wèi)隊 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 086500 325 求調(diào)劑 +3 | 領(lǐng)帶小熊 2026-03-19 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 281求調(diào)劑(0805) +14 | 煙汐憶海 2026-03-16 | 25/1250 |
|
|
[考研]
|
不想起名字112 2026-03-19 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 286求調(diào)劑 +6 | lemonzzn 2026-03-16 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 本科鄭州大學(xué)物理學(xué)院,一志愿華科070200學(xué)碩,346求調(diào)劑 +4 | 我不是一根蔥 2026-03-18 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 0854可跨調(diào)劑,一作一項核心論文五項專利,省、國級證書40+數(shù)一英一287 +8 | 小李0854 2026-03-16 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考研] 收復(fù)試調(diào)劑生 +4 | 雨后秋荷 2026-03-18 | 4/200 |
|