| 5 | 2/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 5930 | 回復(fù): 30 | |||
| 當(dāng)前只顯示滿足指定條件的回帖,點擊這里查看本話題的所有回帖 | |||
F_Shaw捐助貴賓 (著名寫手)
|
[交流]
兩個審稿人給出了大改,但Associate Editor給了拒稿 已有3人參與
|
||
|
Dear Dr. XXXX, Reviewers' comments on your work have now been received. You will see that they are advising that we consider accepting your paper after major revision. However the needed revisions are too substantion to allow the paper to proceed without a second round of review. Please consider my rejection this version a "soft" decision. Both reviewers have indicated that they would like to see the revision and they will be invited to review the new submission. Both reviewers have agreed to be identified. XXXX is Reviewer #1, and XXXXX is Reivewer #2. Both reviewers have downloaded files in addition to the comments listed below. Let me know if you have any problems downloading this files. The one issue that must be addressed in a revision is a clear distinguition from previous publihsed papers. It is fine to document how new data supports conclusions made in prior work, but these must be significant advances and you must be clear as to why the new information either proves or disproves previous studies. Considering the extent of revision needed, I have not provided any editorial input to this version. I would be willing to help you with the revision prior to your formal resubmission. The easiest way to do this is for you to email me your revised manuscript (XXXXXXX) and we can work outside of the Elsevier system. ———————————————— Reviewer #1: The purpose of this paper, as poorly stated in lines 90-95,XXXXXX. I completely re-wrote this paper because without doing so, it would have been impossible to understand the aim of the work. Although the paper is very poorly written, it may be worthy of publication with major revisions. I have two major objections (items 1-2 below) and several recommendations for the authors. XXXXXXX ———————————————— Reviewer #2: The manuscript presented a valuable case study on XXXXX. XXXXXXXXXX. The data analysis is logical, the conclusions are convincing in general. The figures and tables are largely adequate to support the points made in the current manusript. The length of the manuscript is about right, although it could be slightly longer if the authors are going to make revisions according to the reviewer's suggestions. Major issues with the current manuscript include the following: XXXXXXXXX ______________________ 兩個審稿人提了很多意見,Associate Editor的意思是在我重投之前,可以協(xié)助我修改,工作量有點大啊! 各位蟲友有沒有這樣的經(jīng)歷,像這樣機(jī)會大不大? [ Last edited by F_Shaw on 2014-4-11 at 13:58 ] |

木蟲 (著名寫手)
![]() ![]() ![]() |
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]
|
WWW西西弗斯 2026-03-24 | 6/300 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] B區(qū)考研調(diào)劑 +4 | yqdszhdap- 2026-03-22 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 0854AI CV方向招收調(diào)劑 +3 | 章小魚567 2026-03-23 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿北化315 求調(diào)劑 +3 | akrrain 2026-03-24 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 求調(diào)劑 +5 | 林之夕 2026-03-24 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿北京化工大學(xué)材料與化工 264分各科過A區(qū)國家線 +3 | 哈哈157349 2026-03-21 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿吉大化學(xué)322求調(diào)劑 +4 | 17501029541 2026-03-23 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 335分 | 材料與化工專碩 | GPA 4.07 | 有科研經(jīng)歷 +4 | cccchenso 2026-03-23 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 求老師收我 +3 | zzh16938784 2026-03-23 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研]
|
酥酥魚.. 2026-03-21 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 317求調(diào)劑 +12 | 申子申申 2026-03-19 | 18/900 |
|
|
[考研] 315分,誠求調(diào)劑,材料與化工085600 +3 | 13756423260 2026-03-22 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 306求調(diào)劑 +5 | 來好運來來來 2026-03-22 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 材料求調(diào)劑 +5 | @taotao 2026-03-21 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 279求調(diào)劑 +5 | 紅衣隱官 2026-03-21 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 296求調(diào)劑 +6 | www_q 2026-03-18 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 308求調(diào)劑 +3 | 阿姐阿姐家啊 2026-03-18 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿 南京航空航天大學(xué)大學(xué) ,080500材料科學(xué)與工程學(xué)碩 +5 | @taotao 2026-03-20 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 求調(diào)劑 +3 | eation27 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研]
|
不想起名字112 2026-03-19 | 3/150 |
|