| 24小時(shí)熱門(mén)版塊排行榜 |
| 5 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 1215 | 回復(fù): 5 | |||
| 當(dāng)前只顯示滿(mǎn)足指定條件的回帖,點(diǎn)擊這里查看本話(huà)題的所有回帖 | |||
[交流]
這是個(gè)什么狀況,增加參考文獻(xiàn)?怎么增。 已有3人參與
|
|||
|
今天剛收到大修后的意見(jiàn),無(wú)它,就一條Please include more references from other authors. 前段時(shí)間投了2篇系列文章,有個(gè)reviewer抱怨說(shuō)非原創(chuàng)性,并說(shuō)第一篇自引過(guò)多,實(shí)際是他自己數(shù)錯(cuò)了,反正一大堆抱怨,最后也沒(méi)據(jù),建議縮成一篇再投,費(fèi)盡巴查改完了,大老板親自主刀 回復(fù),可能語(yǔ)氣比較沖........然后幾天審稿意見(jiàn)很奇怪 I am not satisfied by the answers of the authors. Regarding to the number of references in part 1, most of them were actually self citations!!! However, the ratio is now better (9 over 25) in the revised version. I understand from the authors that the major contribution of the paper is to make validity tests of innovative procedures using large high quality databases collected on a bridge. This is a confirmation of my comment that the work reported in the paper constitutes a good application of structural health monitoring. To my opinion, the outcome of the paper is of great interest from an engineering point of view even if the scientific content is not original. I thank the authors for merging the two papers in a single one. 第一句貌似極度不滿(mǎn),還3個(gè)嘆號(hào),但后來(lái)感覺(jué)還行啊,也沒(méi)據(jù)沒(méi)收,搞得編輯給個(gè)建議多加參考文獻(xiàn),哪里去找哈,好歹審稿您推薦2篇,我馬上引哈........... |
銀蟲(chóng) (正式寫(xiě)手)
鐵桿木蟲(chóng) (小有名氣)
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|