SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全.docx
《SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全.docx(8页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全
修改稿回答审稿人的意见(最重要的部分)
ListofResponses
DearEditorsandReviewers:
Thankyouforyourletterandforthereviewers’commentsconcerningourmanuscriptentitled“PaperTitle”(ID:
文章稿号).Thosecommentsareallvaluableandveryhelpfulforrevisingandimprovingourpaper,aswellastheimportantguidingsignificancetoourresearches.Wehavestudiedcommentscarefullyandhavemadecorrectionwhichwehopemeetwithapproval.Revisedportionaremarkedinredinthepaper.Themaincorrectionsinthepaperandtherespondstothereviewer’scommentsareasflowing:
Respondstothereviewer’scomments:
Reviewer#1:
1.Responsetocomment:
(……简要列出意见……)
,
Response:
××××××
2.Responsetocomment:
(……简要列出意见……)
Response:
××××××
。
。
。
。
。
。
逐条意见回答,切忌一定不能有遗漏
针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用:
Weareverysorryforournegligenceof……...
Weareverysorryforourincorrectwriting……...
<
ItisreallytrueasReviewersuggestedthat……
WehavemadecorrectionaccordingtotheReviewer’scomments.
Wehavere-writtenthispartaccordingtotheReviewer’ssuggestion
AsReviewersuggestedthat……
ConsideringtheReviewer’ssuggestion,wehave……
最后特意感谢一下这个审稿人的意见:
Specialthankstoyouforyourgoodcomments.
Reviewer#2:
…
同上述
Reviewer#3:
××××××
Otherchanges:
1.Line60-61,thestatementsof“……”werecorrectedas“…………”
2.Line107,“……”wasadded
3.Line129,“……”wasdeleted
××××××
/
Wetriedourbesttoimprovethemanuscriptandmadesomechangesinthemanuscript.Thesechangeswillnotinfluencethecontentandframeworkofthepaper.Andherewedidnotlistthechangesbutmarkedinredinrevisedpaper.
WeappreciateforEditors/Reviewers’warmworkearnestly,andhopethatthecorrectionwillmeetwithapproval.
Onceagain,thankyouverymuchforyourcommentsandsuggestions
以下是审稿人意见和本人的回复。
与大家分享。
从中可以看出,这位审稿人认真读了文章,提出很多宝贵的意见。
这些意见
分布在文章的各个地方。
我很诧异有人真正读了我的文章。
看到这些意见,
我觉得很感激,不是因为接收文章的原因,而是这些意见能真正有助于提高
—
文章的质量。
从中还看出,回答审稿人问题的“技巧”。
对于回答问题,有的人就是一味反驳,却不加改进。
记得ACSStyleGuide里面说,当审稿人问到问题的,哪怕是他理解错误,这
也说明作者这么写,其他读者也会理解错误,引起歧义。
因此,作者就是要
修改句子,使表达不引起歧义。
因此:
有时间一味反驳,还不如指出具体改进在第几页、第几段。
============================================
:
Reviewers'comments:
Reviewer#3:
Whilerevisingthescript,itistobesuggestedthatauthorshouldclearlyindicatetheaim&scopeofthestudyandwhilemakingconclusion,itistobementionedhowthestudyisusefulforthepracticalpurposes.Inadditionthefollowingarethefewsuggestions/comments,whichmaybeincludedwhilerevision.
1.Introductionpartfirstparalastline,authormustavoidtowriteambiguousstatement.,muchworkisstillahead,mayindicateproperly.
2.Authorcouldnotdemonstratethereasonwhy,toselecttheorganiccompoundsuchasethylpyruvateforthisstudy
3.Experimentalpart:
Itisdifficulttounderstandthein-situRAIRSexperimentswithhomemadeliquid-solidRAIRScell.Moredetailedinformationmaybeusefulfortheothersthosewhoareworkinginthearea.Photographoftheassembledcellmaybeincluded.
4.Thedescriptiongivenfortheexperimentalsetup(page4)canbepresentedbyflowdiagraminstead,asaneasetounderstandthesetup.
5.ReslutsPart(Page6):
"COadlayerswithidenticalmonolayercoverages",themonolayercoverage,isitbeenperformedwithsomeadsorptionmodelFurther,itwassuggestedthatCO-saturatedPtsurface,butnotmentionedaboutthesaturationexperiments.Isitobtainedafter60minofCObubbling
、
6.Page12,2ndpara:
ThedisplacementofEtPybyCCl4flushing,isitconfirmedbytheEtPypeaksIfso,ithastobementionedclearlyinthepara.Alsointhesamepara,authorreferredforFig.7aand7bbutinthefigures,itdidn'tappear,onlyfigure7appeared.Ifeelitrefersforfigure7,portionAandB,tobecorrected.Similarly,inthetextreferredthefig2a,2b.etcbutonthefiguresheetitismentionedas2A,2B.etc.tobecorrected.
7.Page14,1stpara:
'contaminationofthePtsurfacebycorrosionofo-ringsinhighconcentrationEtPy',butthestatementhasnotbeensupportedbyotherevidence/literature.
8.Pages14through17:
theobservedreactivityofvarioussolventsforadsorbedCOonthePtsurface(figs3&4)hastobediscussedmoreprecisely.Thisreviewerisunabletofollowthereasonwhytheyshoweddifferentreactivity,isitprincipallyduetotheorganicmoieties,orduetotheimpuritiesofcommerciallyavailablechemicalsoramixedeffect.Ithastobeclearlydemonstrated,however,theonlyexperimentperformedwithCO/waterCCl4woulddifficulttodescribeitindetail.
9.Theauthortrytorestrainwithrepeatedargumentsinthetext.,page3para1:
Itwasgeneralizedthat.........,alsoappearedonpage21firstpara.
10.Captionsofthefiguresaretoolong,thedetaileddescriptionalreadygiveninthetext,hencewouldnotbeincludedhere.Captionsshouldbeshortandcrispy.
===============================================
DearEditor,
!
Iquiteappreciateyourfavoriteconsiderationandthereviewer’sinsightfulcomments.NowIhaverevisedtheJCIS-06-247exactlyaccordingtothereviewer’scomments,andfoundthesecommentsareveryhelpful.Ihopethisrevisioncanmakemypapermoreacceptable.Therevisionswereaddressedpointbypointbelow.
[general]TheobjectiveofthisresearchwasaddedatthebeginningofthethirdparagraphofIntroduction.HowthestudyisusefulforpracticalpurposeswasaddedattheendofConclusionasoneparagraph.
[1]Ambiguousstatement.,“muchworkisstillahead”wasdeleted.
[2]Ethylpyruvatewasusedhereasatypicalcompound(containingtwocarbonylgroups)todemonstratethefeasibilityofusingourdiagnosingtooltodetectlow-coverageCO(comingfromdecarbonylationofEtPy)attheliquid-solidinterface.EtPyisareactantusedinliquid-phasechiralcatalysis,andslightdecompositionofEtPytoadsorbedCOwasreportedtoinfluencethecatalyticperformance.Inaddition,bystudyingthat,wecandirectlycompareourresultswithpreviousstudies.MoredetailsinthefirstparagraphofSection.
{
[3]TheIRcellwasdesignedaccordingtotheIRcellsusedbymanyelectrochemicalworkers.Referenceswereadded.AphotowasgivenintheSupportingInformation.
[4]AflowdiagramoftheexperimentalsetupwasgiveninthenewFig.1.
[5]TheCOadsorptionexperimentswereperformedinthesameadsorptionmode,bybubblingCOthroughacleanPtsurfaceindifferentdaystoachievethesamesaturationcoverageofCO.InitialexperimentsindicatedthatgiventheCObubblingratewascm3/min,COcansaturateonPtafter30-45min.WebubbleCOfor60mintoguaranteethesameCOcoverage.IfwebubbleCOformoretime,orifweincreasetheCOflowingrateseveraltimes,theCOsaturationcoveragedoesn’tchange,indicating60minisalreadyenough.AfigureshowingtheCOuptakeasafunctionofbubblingtimewasgivenintheSupportingInformation.
[6]ThedisplacementofEtPybyCCl4wasconfirmedbytheremovingofEtPypeaks.ThementionofFig.7aand7betc.throughoutthetextwereallcorrected.
,
[7]ItisknownthatsomesolventssuchasacetonecancorrodetheVitono-ring.Wesawthedamageofo-ringafterusinghigh-concentrationEtPy.AreferencetotheVitono-ringinformationwasgiven.
[8]Theobservedreactivitytrendisduetoacombinationofbotheffects,withtheaccumulationoforganicmoietiesonPtsurfaceduringnumerousflushingcyclesthemoreimportantreason.Afewpropersentenceswereaddedtoclaritythispoint.
[9]TherepeatedargumentsinthefirstparagraphinSectionweredeleted.
[10]Thetoo-longcaptionsweresignificantlyshortened.
(
Inall,Ifoundthereviewer’scommentsarequitehelpful,andIrevisedmypaperpoint-by-point.Thankyouandthereviewagainforyourhelp!
==============================================
结果:
欢迎浏览:
OrganicChemistryonSolidSurfaces(Review)
Z.Ma,F.Zaera*,SurfaceScenceReports61(2006)229-281.
ScienceDirectTOP25HottestArticlesinChemistry
—
CI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板
修改稿回答审稿人的意见(最重要的部分)
ListofResponses
DearEditorsandReviewers:
Thankyouforyourletterandforthereviewers’commentsconcerningourmanuscriptentitled“PaperTitle”(ID:
文章稿号).Thosecommentsareallvaluableandveryhelpfulforrevisingandimprovingourpaper,aswellastheimportantguidingsignificancetoourresearches.Wehavestudiedcommentscarefullyandhavemadecorrectionwhichwehopemeetwithapproval.Revisedportionaremarkedinredinthepaper.Themaincorrectionsinthepaperandtherespondstothereviewer’scommentsareasflowing:
^
Respondstothereviewer’scomments:
Reviewer#1:
1.Responsetocomment:
(……简要列出意见……)
Response:
××××××
2.Responsetocomment:
(……简要列出意见……)
Response:
××××××
。
。
。
。
。
。
逐条意见回答,切忌一定不能有遗漏
?
针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用:
Weareverysorryforournegligenceof……...
Weareverysorryforourincorrectwriting……...
ItisreallytrueasReviewersuggestedthat……
WehavemadecorrectionaccordingtotheReviewer’scomments.
Wehavere-writtenthispartaccordingtotheReviewer’ssuggestion
AsReviewersuggestedthat……
ConsideringtheReviewer’ssuggestion,wehave……
最后特意感谢一下这个审稿人的意见:
Specialthankstoyouforyourgoodcomments.
Reviewer#2:
同上述
Reviewer#3:
××××××
Otherchanges:
1.Line60-61,thestatementsof“……”werecorrectedas“…………”
2.Line107,“……”wasadded
3.Line129,“……”wasdeleted
××××××
Wetriedourbesttoimprovethemanuscriptandmadesomechangesinthemanuscript.Thesechangeswillnotinfluencethecontentandframeworkofthepaper.Andherewedidnotlistthechangesbutmarkedinredinrevisedpaper.
WeappreciateforEditors/Reviewers’warmworkearnestly,andhopethatthecorrectionwillmeetwitha