 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 5 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 6273 | 回復(fù): 29 | ||
| 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 | ||
fatbone木蟲 (小有名氣)
|
[求助]
求助，投到IEEE GRSL的文章被Reject and Resubmit 已有6人參與
|
|
|
投到IEEE GRSL的文章，初稿有四個審稿人。關(guān)于初稿，編輯給的結(jié)果是大修。在初稿的審稿意見中，第四個審稿人只提了一個很小的問題，所以編輯可能覺得沒有必然再將修改稿返回給他評審。于是修改稿的審稿人就只剩原來四個審稿人中的前三個了。從下面的修改稿的審稿意見中看得出來，審稿人Reviewer 1和Reviewer 3已經(jīng)沒有什么大意見，相當(dāng)于推薦發(fā)表了，可是審稿人Reviewer 2還是意見很大。于是最終編輯就給了“Reject and Resubmit”。其實編輯也說了，主要是因為某個審稿人意見大（Since the comments (in particular from one Reviewer) are not minor），就是指的Reviewer 2吧。郁悶！下面就把修改稿的審稿意見貼在下面。 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Mr.***: Your paper has been carefully reviewed by the GRSL review panel and found to be unacceptable in its present form. The reviewers did suggest, however, that if completely revised the paper might be found acceptable. We encourage you to revise and resubmit this manuscript as a new paper to GRSL. If you decide to resubmit, please use "Create a resubmission" link in your Author Center. Your resubmission is due by 23-Feb-2015. Below you will find comments from the review panel. Any attached files that may be referenced with these comments can be accessed in a copy of this decision letter located in your Author Center on ScholarOne Manuscripts. Sincerely, Prof. *** Editor-in-Chief, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters Associate Editor Comments: Associate Editor Comments to the Author: Your manuscript has been improved during this revision round. However, there are still serious concerns regarding the clarity and the experiments which still deserve to be considered. Since the comments (in particular from one Reviewer) are not minor, I am recommending a “Reject and Resubmit”. Please address all Reviewers’ comments carefully so that, in case you decide to resubmit it to GRSL, we can assign your manuscript to the same Reviewers. Reviewer(s) Comments: Reviewer: 1 Comments to the Author The paper has been quite improved. In the experimental analysis, other well-known approaches have been added for comparison. About this, I would probably choose to use the iterative versions of MAD and PCA algorithms, such as IR-MAD and IterativePCA, which have been proven to be more effective. I don't ask to put new experiments, but it would be interesting to see if the comparison with these techniques gives the same results of the previous one. Beside that, the Authors have responded adequately to my questions and I would recommend the paper for acceptance. Reviewer: 2 Comments to the Author The paper is slightly improved with respect to its previous version. However there are still several missing/incomplete/unclear information/sentences and experimental analysis are not convincing. The methodological part is not well-explained and very difficult to understand. My detailed comments are given below: 1-The proposed method is devoted to ***. However, the results are compared with the methods that assess ***. Thus, I think this comparison is not fair and also it is not clear how these methods are applied for the analysis in this paper. 2-The methods used for comparison are mostly for multispectral images. However, in the paper it is not clear to me how these methods are applied to the hyperspectral images for comparison purposes. Thus, again I found it very unfair to compare. 3-The methods considered are formulated in a very poor way, and there are still several symbols not defined. For example, the operations in (4), (5) and (6) are not defined and also N is set to both number of image pixels and number of images considered at the same time. 4-The data sets used are very simple and not enough to prove the effectiveness of the present work. In addition, the number of hyperspectral image bands and the data acquisition times are not mentioned. Reviewer: 3 Comments to the Author The conclusion should be reworked to highlight the current limitations of the algorithm (applied on a small area + high processing time) and future work directions shall mention these as axis of future research. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 初稿的審稿意見提的問題很多，我的response寫了接近二十頁。修改稿提交后，審了三個多月，現(xiàn)在審稿意見回來了，就貼在上面，比較少。算上初稿的第四個人審稿人，審稿人中的四分之三（也就是除了修改稿中的意見很大的審稿人Reviewer 2）都看懂了算法，也都認(rèn)可了文章，基本上不大反對發(fā)表�？善玆eviewer 2還是覺得算法很難，看不懂。我是不知道他是真的看不懂，還是壓根就沒仔細(xì)看�，F(xiàn)在編輯給了“Reject and Resubmit”，我想請教幾個問題： 1）Reject and Resubmit的話，我是不是就不用或者不能寫response了？因為我覺得意見很大的那個審稿人Reviewer 2可能沒看懂文章或者沒認(rèn)真看，有些誤會。例如在他的審稿意見中，第三條說 “N is set to both number of image pixels and number of images considered at the same time.”，實際上我仔細(xì)核對文章后確認(rèn)我并沒有犯這個錯誤，而且其他三個審稿人也沒人認(rèn)為有這種錯誤，還有他說“operations in (4), (5) and (6) are not defined”，其實公式(4)(5)(6)是教科書中就會講的三個很普通的公式，真的沒有什么好說的，而且IEEE GRSL有篇幅要求，真要展開講，內(nèi)容就超過期刊要求了。現(xiàn)在這個審稿人reviewer 2提出這些問題，我真是有點懷疑他可能是我比較的某個文章的作者，他覺得他的效果很不好，所以有些惱火。Reject and Resubmit的話，假如我不能response，就不能解釋(畢竟有些解釋的話不能寫在文章中)，文章重新投稿后，編輯再讓他審稿，看目前的架勢，我還是死路一條。 2）初稿的審稿人是四個，而修改稿的審稿人是三個。我感覺修改稿的Reviewer 2不是初稿的Reviewer 2，很可能是初稿審稿人中的Reviewer 3，這個是我從審稿意見的語氣和用詞相似度推斷出來的。請問這個我現(xiàn)在可以寫信問編輯嗎？我想看看修改稿的Reviewer 2是否是初稿審稿人的Reviewer 3，或者我想知道修改稿的Reviewer 2是對應(yīng)初稿的哪個審稿人，然后結(jié)合他給的初稿的審稿意見再去修改文章。 3）問題有些老套，就是文章“Reject and Resubmit”后，還值得再投稿到IEEE GRSL嗎？被接受的可能性如何呢？我問這個問題，一方面是因為畢竟IEEE GRSL這個期刊檔次比較高，確實很難中，Resubmit的話，編輯明確說是“as a new paper to GRSL”；另一方面，我的時間真的等不起了！關(guān)于截止日期，編輯給的是“Your resubmission is due by 23-Feb-2015.”，這就基本上是五個月的時間，看樣子即使Resubmit，我也不能太早提交上去，否則可能會被認(rèn)為不認(rèn)真對待不好好修改。 4）如果我重新將文章投稿到IEEE GRSL的話，是否可以申請回避修改稿中的這個意見很大的審稿人Reviewer 2呢？或者不再將稿件給這個人審稿呢？ 大家?guī)臀铱纯春脝幔繎┱埥o我一些建議。 非常非常感謝�。。。�！ |
回復(fù)此樓» 猜你喜歡
【求調(diào)劑】新能源材料本科，一志愿211，初試321
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
材料考研調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
材料調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有12人回復(fù)
-
英一數(shù)一408，總分284，二戰(zhàn)真誠求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有14人回復(fù)
-
085410 一志愿211 22408分?jǐn)?shù)359求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
-
271求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有19人回復(fù)
-
385分 生物學(xué)（071000）求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
一志愿安徽大學(xué)計算機(jī)科學(xué)與技術(shù)學(xué)碩，331分求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
318求調(diào)劑，計算材料方向
已經(jīng)有8人回復(fù)
-
291求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有25人回復(fù)
» 本主題相關(guān)價值貼推薦，對您同樣有幫助:
- 審稿人一個major revision，一個reject，編輯建議resubmit，大家遇到這個怎么處理？
已經(jīng)有8人回復(fù)
- 請大家?guī)兔Ψ治鲆幌拢〉诙瓮陡�，AE給reject，主編給major revision.
已經(jīng)有13人回復(fù)
- reject resubmit,中間沒有and。意思是“拒絕重新投稿”了嗎？？
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
- 還是reject and resubmitted
已經(jīng)有8人回復(fù)
- major revisions and resubmit，可是怎么回復(fù)審稿人呢？
已經(jīng)有16人回復(fù)
- 投了一篇IJMPC的論文，第二次resubmit 中的幾率大嗎？
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
- Reject with Resubmit 還有希望嗎？
已經(jīng)有9人回復(fù)
- Reject & Resubmit 大家看一下重投有機(jī)會嗎
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
- 求助reject還是resubmit
已經(jīng)有18人回復(fù)
- GRSL從Major Revision到Reject and Resubmit，悲�。�
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
- reject and resubmit
已經(jīng)有12人回復(fù)
- Reject and Resubmit 接收率？
已經(jīng)有13人回復(fù)
- 關(guān)于reject and resubmit 的問題
已經(jīng)有14人回復(fù)
- MMOR reject and resubmit
已經(jīng)有15人回復(fù)
- Reject & Resubmit
已經(jīng)有18人回復(fù)
- 求助 Reject and Resubmit
已經(jīng)有6人回復(fù)
- 關(guān)于Reject and Resubmit？？？？？？
已經(jīng)有12人回復(fù)
- reject and resubmit
已經(jīng)有8人回復(fù)
fatbone
木蟲 (小有名氣)
- 應(yīng)助: 0 (幼兒園)
- 金幣: 1534.7
- 散金: 290
- 沙發(fā): 7
- 帖子: 239
- 在線: 278.2小時
- 蟲號: 1307626
- 注冊: 2011-05-27
- 性別: GG
9樓2014-09-28 14:10:14
自私的貓1988
榮譽版主 (文壇精英)
- 應(yīng)助: 4800 (副教授)
- 貴賓: 6.746
- 金幣: 50040.4
- 散金: 11517
- 紅花: 256
- 沙發(fā): 134
- 帖子: 11684
- 在線: 1473.7小時
- 蟲號: 2004083
- 注冊: 2012-09-16
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 有機(jī)分子功能材料化學(xué)
- 管轄: 論文投稿
2樓2014-09-28 07:39:02
fatbone
木蟲 (小有名氣)
- 應(yīng)助: 0 (幼兒園)
- 金幣: 1534.7
- 散金: 290
- 沙發(fā): 7
- 帖子: 239
- 在線: 278.2小時
- 蟲號: 1307626
- 注冊: 2011-05-27
- 性別: GG
3樓2014-09-28 12:08:43
自私的貓1988
榮譽版主 (文壇精英)
- 應(yīng)助: 4800 (副教授)
- 貴賓: 6.746
- 金幣: 50040.4
- 散金: 11517
- 紅花: 256
- 沙發(fā): 134
- 帖子: 11684
- 在線: 1473.7小時
- 蟲號: 2004083
- 注冊: 2012-09-16
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 有機(jī)分子功能材料化學(xué)
- 管轄: 論文投稿
4樓2014-09-28 12:11:50
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 342求調(diào)劑 +12 | Mary Keen 2026-03-28 | 13/650 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 266分求材料化工冶金礦業(yè)等專業(yè)的調(diào)劑 +7 | 哇呼哼呼哼 2026-03-26 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085600，320分求調(diào)劑 +5 | 大饞小子 2026-04-01 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿西安交大材料學(xué)碩（英一數(shù)二）347，求調(diào)劑到高分子/材料相關(guān)專業(yè) +7 | zju51 2026-03-31 | 9/450 |
|
|
|
[考研] 265求調(diào)劑 +11 | yelck 2026-04-01 | 12/600 |
|
|
|
[考研] 0703一志愿南師大334求調(diào)劑 +4 | seven7yu 2026-03-30 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085600，材料與化工321分調(diào)劑 +5 | 大饞小子 2026-03-27 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 環(huán)境工程 085701，267求調(diào)劑 +15 | minht 2026-03-29 | 16/800 |
|
|
|
[考研] 考研材料工程351分調(diào)劑 +5 | 整個好的 2026-03-31 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 339求調(diào)劑 +5 | zjjkt 2026-03-31 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料工程085601數(shù)二英一335求調(diào)劑 +5 | 雙馬尾痞老板2 2026-03-31 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 299求調(diào)劑 +8 | 嗯嗯嗯嗯2 2026-03-27 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 考研調(diào)劑求助 +7 | 13287130938 2026-03-31 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿南昌大學(xué)324求調(diào)劑 +6 | hanamiko 2026-03-29 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 求收留 +8 | 1943443204 2026-03-28 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 297求調(diào)劑 +17 | 田洪有 2026-03-26 | 18/900 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿廈門大學(xué)材料工程專碩354找調(diào)劑�。�！ +5 | 貝唄鋇鋇 2026-03-30 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085602 化學(xué)工程專碩 340分求調(diào)劑 +4 | qianbai11 2026-03-29 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 調(diào)劑 +3 | 李嘉圖·S·路 2026-03-27 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 打過很多競賽，085406控制工程300分，求調(diào)劑 +3 | askeladz 2026-03-26 | 3/150 |
|