Review Form
Section I. General Information
A. Overview
1. Reader Interest. Which category describes this manuscript?*
Practice/Application/Case Study/Experience Report
Research/Technology
Survey/Tutorial/How-To
2. How relevant is this manuscript to the readers of this periodical? Please explain your rating.*
Very Relevant
Relevant
Interesting - but not very relevant
Irrelevant
Comment
B. Content
1. Please explain how this manuscript advances this field of research and/or contributes something new to the literature.*
2. Is the manuscript technically sound? Please explain your answer.*
Yes
Appears to be - but didn't check completely
Partially
No
Comment
C. Presentation
1. Are the title, abstract, and keywords appropriate? Please comment.*
Yes
No
Comment
2. Does the manuscript contain sufficient and appropriate references? Please comment*
References are sufficient and appropriate
Important references are missing; more references are needed
Number of references are excessive
Comment
3. Does the introduction state the objectives of the manuscript in terms that encourage the reader to read on? Please explain your answer*
Yes
Could be improved
No
Comment
4. How would you rate the organization of the manuscript? Is it focused? Is the length appropriate for the topic? Please comment.*
Satisfactory
Could be improved
Poor
Comment
5. Please rate and comment on the readability of this manuscript and quality of English.*
Easy to read
Readable - but requires some effort to understand
Difficult to read and understand
Unreadable
Comment
Section II. Summary and Recommendation
A. Evaluation
Please rate the manuscript. Explain your choice.*
Award Quality
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Comment
B. Recommendation
Please make your recommendation and explain your decision.*
Accept with no changes
Author should prepare a minor revision
Author should prepare a major revision for a second review
Reject
Comment
Section III. Detailed Comments
A. Public Comments (these will be made available to the author)*
B. Confidential Comments (authors will not see these comments)*
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
* Denotes required field
1、 目标和结果不清晰。
It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader.
2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。
In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical methods used in the study. Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these various experiments should be provided.
3、对于研究设计的rationale:
Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design.
4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨:
The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not show
if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation.
5、对hypothesis的清晰界定:
A hypothesis needs to be presented。
6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念:
What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio?
7、对研究问题的定义:
Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear,
write one section to define the problem
8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review:
The topic is novel but the application proposed is not so novel.
9、对claim,如A>B的证明,verification:
There is no experimental comparison of the algorithm with previously known work, so it is impossible to judge whether the algorithm is an improvement on previous work.
10、严谨度问题:
MNQ is easier than the primitive PNQS, how to prove that.
11、格式(重视程度):
In addition, the list of references is not in our style. It is close but not completely correct. I have attached a pdf file with "Instructions for Authors" which shows examples.
Before submitting a revision be sure that your material is properly prepared and formatted. If you are unsure, please consult the formatting nstructions to authors that are given under the "Instructions and Forms" button in he upper right-hand corner of the screen.
12、语言问题(出现最多的问题):
有关语言的审稿人意见:
It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader.
The authors must have their work reviewed by a proper translation/reviewing service before submission; only then can a proper review be performed. Most sentences contain grammatical and/or spelling mistakes or are not complete sentences.
As presented, the writing is not acceptable for the journal. There are problems with sentence structure, verb tense, and clause construction.
The English of your manuscript must be improved before resubmission. We strongly suggest that you obtain assistance from a colleague who is well-versed in English or whose native language is English.
Please have someone competent in the English language and the subject matter of your paper go over the paper and correct it ?
the quality of English needs improving.
Reviewer 4
Reviewer Recommendation Term: Reject
Overall Reviewer Manuscript Rating: 25
Comments to Editor: Reviewers are required to enter their name, affiliation and e-mail address below. Please note this is for administrative purposes and will not be seen by the author.
Title (Prof./Dr./Mr./Mrs.): Prof.
Name: XXX
Affiliation: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx
Manuscript entitled "Synthesis XXX。。。。。。。。。。。" it has been synthesized with a number of different methods and in a variety of forms. This manuscript does not bring any new knowledge or data on materials property and therefore only contribution may be in novel preparation method, still this point is not elaborated properly (see Remark 1). Presentation and writing is rather poor; there are several statements not supported with data (for some see Remarks 2) and even some flaws (see Remark 3). For these reasons I suggest to reject paper in the present form.
1. The paper describes a new method for preparation of XXXX, but:
- the new method has to be compared with other methods for preparation of XXXXpowders (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - discussion),(通常的写作格式,审稿人实际上很在意的)
- it has to be described why this method is better or different from other methods, (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - discussion),
- it has to be added in the manuscript what kind of XXXXXX by other methods compared to this novel one (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - discussion),
- it has to be outlined what is the benefit of this method (ABSTRACT, RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS).
(很多人不会写这个地方,大家多学习啊)
2. When discussing XRD data XXXauthors
- state that XXXXX
- state that XXXX
- This usually happens with increasing sintering time, but are there any data to present, density, particle size?
(很多人用XRD,结果图放上去就什么都不管了,这是不应该的)
3. When discussing luminescence measurements authors write "XXXXXIf there is second harmonic in excitation beam it will stay there no matter what type of material one investigates!!!
(研究了什么???)
4.英语写作要提高
(这条很多人的软肋,大家努力啊)
Reviewer 5
Reviewer Recommendation Term: Reject
Overall Reviewer Manuscript Rating: N/A
Comments to Editor:
Title (Prof./Dr./Mr./Mrs.)rof.
Name:(国人)
Affiliation: XXXXXXXXxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxx
Dear editor:
Thank you for inviting me to evaluate the article titled "XXXX“. In this paper, the authors investigated the influences of sintering condition on the crystal structure and XXXXXX, However, it is difficult for us to understand the manuscript because of poor English being used. The text is not well arranged and the logic is not clear. Except English writing, there are many mistakes in the manuscript and the experimental results don't show good and new results. So I recommend to you that this manuscript can not be accepted. The following are the questions and some mistakes in this manuscript:
(看看总体评价,不达标,很多人被这样郁闷了,当然审稿人也有他的道理)
1. TheXXXXXXX. However, this kind material had been investigated since 1997 as mentioned in the author's manuscript, and similar works had been published in similar journals. What are the novel findings in the present work? The synthesis method and luminescence properties reported in this manuscript didn't supply enough evidence to support the prime novelty statement.
(这位作者好猛,竟然翻出自己19xx年的中文文章翻译了一边就敢投国际知名杂志,而且没有新的创新!
朋友们也看到了,一稿多发,中文,英文双版发表在网络时代太难了,运气不好审稿人也是国人,敢情曾经看过你的文章,所以必死无疑,这位作者老兄就命运差了,刚好被审稿人看
见,所以毫无疑问被拒,(呵呵,我97年刚上初一没见到这个文章,哈哈))
2. In page 5, the author mentioned that: "XXXX Based on our knowledge, "sintering" describes the process when the powders become ceramics. So, I think the word "synthesis" should be better instead of "sintering" here. Second, the XRD patterns didn't show obvious difference between three "sintering" temperatures of 700, 800 and 900 ?C.
(作者老兄做工作太不仔细了,虫子们可别犯啊)
3. Also in the page X, the author mentioned that: XXX。。。。。。。。。。 However, the author didn't supply the morphologies of particles at different synthesizing temperatures. What are the experimental results or the references which support the author's conclusion that the XXXX properties would be influenced by the particle size?
(作者仍在瞎说,这个问题我也指出了,不光我还是看着国人的份上让修改,添加很多东西,说实话,文章看的很累很累)
4. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX However, to my knowledge, after the milling, the particles size will be decreased exactly, but how and what to destroy the host structure?
(虫子们自己注意)
5. XXX on the vertical axis of the XRD patterns was meaningless, because author add several patterns in one figure. It is obvious that these spectra are not measured by ordinary methods. (都是老问题,不说了)
如何学习审稿专家学者为什么愿意拿出大量的时间审稿呢为期刊审稿是义务也是一份荣耀更是自我价值的实现那就是为进步做出了一份贡献审稿人都…
本科毕业生毕业论文评阅意见论文评语论文评语要可参考下列内容简要概述论文的内容学生对论文写作的态度文献综述是否充分论点是否突出内容是…
英文论文审稿意见汇总以下12点无轻重主次之分每一点内容由总结性标题和代表性审稿人意见构成1目标和结果不清晰Itisnotedtha…
ReviewFormSectionIGeneralInformationAOverview1ReaderInterestWhichcategoryde…
求如何写论文审稿意见一般审稿意见至少要包含三条1简要描述论文的研究内容和意义并作出评价对于其比较好的部分要给于肯定2针对文章中的内…
几年的写论文和审稿心得从硕士到博士,这些年来也小有了一点成果,一篇NANOTECHNOLOGY,两篇CARBON,三篇3.0以下的…
怎样写好论文全国十五、六种学报、杂志审稿占用了我业余生活的大部分时间,每年的审稿量少说有100篇。近年来,觉得稿件质量大不如前。在…
本科毕业生毕业论文评阅意见论文评语论文评语要可参考下列内容简要概述论文的内容学生对论文写作的态度文献综述是否充分论点是否突出内容是…
硕士论文评审意见模板该论文在概述相关学术文献和发展趋势的基础上通过对现状和问题分析提出具有一定理论意义和实际应用价值论文根据该论文…
毕业论文评审意见导师意见范文模板又到一年论文答辩时很多同学需要自己写评审意见导师意见下面列出了我通过收集的一些模板和范围方便大家参…
选题报告一、选题报告要素1.选题名称2.选题的价值3.选题酝酿、形成的过程4.选题的内容和形式设想5.读者对象6.拟请的作者7.时…