| 查看: 5889 | 回復(fù): 30 | ||||
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。 各位蟲友有沒有這樣的經(jīng)歷,像這樣機會大不大? [ Last edited by F_Shaw on 2014-4-11 at 13:58 ] |
Cover_Letter |

![]() ![]() ![]() |
鐵桿木蟲 (知名作家)

| 2 |
至尊木蟲 (文壇精英)
|
捐助貴賓 (著名寫手)

至尊木蟲 (文壇精英)
| 祝福 |
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 268求調(diào)劑 +6 | 簡單點0 2026-03-17 | 6/300 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 材料與化工求調(diào)劑 +6 | 為學(xué)666 2026-03-16 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 268求調(diào)劑 +8 | 一定有學(xué)上- 2026-03-14 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考研] 085601求調(diào)劑 +4 | Du.11 2026-03-16 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 材料與化工專碩調(diào)劑 +5 | heming3743 2026-03-16 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 材料工程專碩274一志愿211求調(diào)劑 +6 | 薛云鵬 2026-03-15 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 藥學(xué)383 求調(diào)劑 +3 | 藥學(xué)chy 2026-03-15 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 中科院材料273求調(diào)劑 +4 | yzydy 2026-03-15 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 085601材料工程315分求調(diào)劑 +3 | yang_0104 2026-03-15 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 材料工程327求調(diào)劑 +3 | xiaohe12w 2026-03-11 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 330求調(diào)劑 +3 | ?醬給調(diào)劑跪了 2026-03-13 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] [0860]321分求調(diào)劑,ab區(qū)皆可 +4 | 寶貴熱 2026-03-13 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿西南交大,材料專碩317求調(diào)劑 +5 | lx8568 2026-03-11 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 304求調(diào)劑 +7 | 7712b 2026-03-13 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] (081700)化學(xué)工程與技術(shù)-298分求調(diào)劑 +12 | 11啦啦啦 2026-03-11 | 35/1750 |
|
|
[考研] 材料與化工085600調(diào)劑求老師收留 +9 | jiaanl 2026-03-11 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考研] 301求調(diào)劑 +6 | Liyouyumairs 2026-03-11 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 085600材料與化工 309分請求調(diào)劑 +7 | dtdxzxx 2026-03-12 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿山大07化學(xué) 332分 四六級已過 本科山東雙非 求調(diào)劑! +3 | 不想理你 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 |
|