|
|
[交流]
第一篇SCI 現(xiàn)在狀態(tài)是Resive 沒(méi)標(biāo)大修還是小修 請(qǐng)各位前輩幫忙看下希望大不 已有4人參與
小弟第一次投SCI 水平很一般的 投的是Elsevier的Ocean Engineering
去年12月投的初稿,編輯返回說(shuō)修改英語(yǔ)后,改好后1月份重新提交,然后很快的進(jìn)入了with editor狀態(tài),一直到5月11號(hào)才under review,6月1號(hào)狀態(tài)變成了Required Reviews Completed
今天狀態(tài)變成了resive并收到主編編來(lái)信
![第一篇SCI 現(xiàn)在狀態(tài)是Resive 沒(méi)標(biāo)大修還是小修 請(qǐng)各位前輩幫忙看下希望大不]()
編輯的意見如下:
The reviewers have commented on your above paper submitted to Ocean Engineering. They indicated that it is not acceptable for publication in its present form.
However, if you feel that you can suitably address the reviewers' comments (included below) by Jul 20, 2015, I invite you to revise and resubmit your manuscript.
Please carefully address the issues raised in the comments. If a reviewer indicates that comments were uploaded in a separate file, this can be found by clicking "View Reviewer Attachments" under "Action Links" on your Author Main Page.
一共有兩個(gè)審稿人意見
第一個(gè):
The paper describes a predictive control method for a water hydraulic variable ballast system for submersible vehicles.
1. The paper has many grammatical issues that need to be addressed. I have outlined them directly on the attached manuscript.
2. On page 8, more detail is needed describing....后面就不例舉了,都是寫修改格式和添加詳細(xì)描述的意見
第二個(gè):
Yes, using the ballast tank is effective than the jet to control submersible vehicles. The depth and pitch control can be done by using the ballast tanks.
This paper focuses on the implementation of the system not to providing contributions of this paper clearly. For examples, Figs. 17 ~ 22 are not readable.
The meaning of showing the figures is not clear. There are two figure 21's.
In the revision, the major contribution of this research should be emphasized in stead of describing the general issues in detail.
我請(qǐng)問(wèn)一下各位前輩,這算大修還是小修,第二個(gè)審稿專家說(shuō)論文的貢獻(xiàn)不夠突出,是不是在Abstract和Introduction中添加一些本文研究工作的目的和意義的描述呀?
還有這種意見修改后再提交,錄用的希望大不大呀? |
» 收錄本帖的淘帖專輯推薦
» 猜你喜歡
» 本主題相關(guān)價(jià)值貼推薦,對(duì)您同樣有幫助:
|