英文审稿意见汇总.docx

1、英文审稿意见汇总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 ge

2、neral, 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

3、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

4、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 problem8、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AB的证明，verification: There is no experimental comparison of the algorithm with pr

5、eviously 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

6、 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

7、-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

8、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

9、 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. Pleas

10、e 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.来自编辑的鼓励：Encouragement from reviewers: I would be very glad to re-review the paper in greater depth once it has been edited because the subj

11、ect is interesting. There is continued interest in your manuscript titled which you submitted to the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research: Part B - Applied Biomaterials. The Submission has been greatly improved and is worthy of publication.The paper is very annoying to read as it is riddled with

12、 grammatical errors and poorly constructed sentences. Furthermore, the novelty and motivation of the work is not well justified. Also, the experimental study is shallow. In fact, I cant figure out the legends as it is too small! How does your effort compares with state-of-the-art? The experiment is

13、the major problem in the paper. Not only the dataset is not published, but also the description is very rough. It is impossible to replicate the experiment and verify the claim of the author. Furthermore, almost no discussion for the experimental result is given. E.g. why the author would obtain thi

14、s result? Which component is the most important? Any further improvement? the author should concentrated on the new algorithm with your idea and explained its advantages clearly with a most simple words. it is good concept, but need to polish layout, language. The authors did a good job in motivatin

15、g the problem studied in the introduction. The mathematic explanation of the proposed solutions is also nice. Furthermore, the paper is accompanied by an adequate set of experiments for evaluating the effectiveness of the solutions the authors propose. Apparently， Obviously ,Innovation ,refine ,In m

16、y humble opinion如果仍然有需要修改的小毛病，一般你可以用you paper has been conditionally accepted. Please revise .according to review comments.如果是接受，你可以用We are very pleased to inform you that your paper xxxxx has been accepted by journal name. Please prepare your paper by journal template.At a first glance, this short

17、manuscript seems an interesting piece ofwork, reporting on . Fine, good quality, but all this has been done and published, and nearly become a well-known phenomenon. Therefore, there is insufficient novelty or significance to meet publication criteria. Also, I did not see any expermental evidence ho

18、w the * is related with *, except for the hand-waving qualitative discussion. Therefore, I cannot support its publication in JPD in its present form. It should be rejected.建议去小木虫问问，那里有一些资源。the journals copy editors should not have to fix the many remaining errors. I sympathize that Chinese languages

19、 do not have an equivalent of English articles a, an, the and dont seem to grasp the material meaning of those words. The authors English expert decided to insert the word the in front of most mentions of tip-tilt system. This implies that there is only one system and the authors are using it exclus

20、ively. There are dozns of other misuses. Pages 2,3, 8,9,10,11, and 12 are littered with them. The paper is to difficult to read in its present form.感想：一篇好的论文，从内容到形式都需要精雕细琢。附1：中译审稿意见审稿意见1(1) 英文表达太差，尽管意思大致能表达清楚，但文法错误太多。(2) 文献综述较差，观点或论断应有文献支持。(3) 论文读起来像是XXX的广告，不知道作者与XXX是否没有关联。(4) 该模式的创新性并非如作者所述，目前有许多XX

21、采取此模式（如美国地球物理学会），作者应详加调查并分析XXX运作模式的创新点。(5) 该模式也不是作者所说的那样成功(审稿人结合论文中的数据具体分析)审稿意见2(1) 缺少直接相关的文献引用(如)。(2) 写作质量达不到美国学术期刊的标准。审稿意见3(1) 作者应着重指出指出本人的贡献。(2) 缺少支持作者发现的方法学分析。(3) 需要采用表格和图件形式展示(数据)材料。附2：英文审稿意见(略有删节)Reviewer: 1There are many things wrong with this paper.The English is very bad. Although the meani

22、ng is by and large clear, not too many sentences are correct.The literature review is poor. The paper is riddled with assertions and claims that should be supported by references.The paper reads as an advertisement for XXX. It is not clear that the author is independent of XXX.The AA model of XXX is

23、 not as innovative as the author claims. There are now many XX that follow this model (American Geophysical Union, for example), and the author should survey these model to see which one first introduced the elements of the XXX model.The model is also not as successful as the author claims. Overall,

24、 the presentation and the contents of the paper can only mean that I reject that the paper be rejected.Reviewer: 2The are two major problems with this paper:(1) It is missing the context of (and citations to) what is now know as the two-sided market literature including that directly related to (e.g

25、. Braunstein, JASIS 1977; Economides & Katsanakas, Mgt. Sci., 2006; McCabe & Snyder, B.E. J Econ Analysis, 2007).(2) The writing quality is not up to the standard of a US scholarly journal.Reviewer: 31. The author should accentuate his contributions in this manuscript.2. It lacks analytical methodol

26、ogies to support authors discoveries.3. Description style material like this manuscript requires structured tables & figures for better presentations.Ms. Ref. No.: *Title: * Materials Science and Engineering Dear Dr. *,Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will see that they are advising t

27、hat you revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision.For your guidance, reviewers' comments are appended below. Reviewer #1: This work proposes an extensive review on micromulsion-based methods for the synthesis of Ag na

28、noparticles. As such, the matter is of interest, however the paper suffers for two serious limits:1)the overall quality of the English language is rather poor;2)some Figures must be selected from previous literature to discuss also the synthesis of anisotropically shaped Ag nanoparticles (there are

29、several examples published), which has been largely overlooked throughout the paper. ; Once the above concerns are fully addressed, the manuscript could be accepted for publication in this journal.英文论文写作、投稿详解(整理各大学术论坛相关帖子，转帖) 目前科技论文作者向国际英文科技期刊投稿的方式有三种。一是传统的邮寄形式，即通过国际快件将论文的原稿邮寄给刊物的主编或编辑部。这种形式曾经是投稿的近乎

30、唯一的方式，持续了漫长的岁月，可现在采用这种方式接受来稿的刊物越来越少了。二是用电子邮件的方式投稿，即作者将原稿的电子文件发至主编或编辑部的电子信箱。这种投稿方式显然比邮寄快得多，但与邮寄一样，稿件也有丢失的时候。目前采用这种纳稿方式的期刊还很多，但有很大一部分期刊己经在此基础上，又进了一步，发展到第三种也是目前最新的一种投稿方式，即网上投稿 (ON-LINE SUBMISSION)。这种方式速度快，而且稿件不会丢失。一旦作者在网上登记注册投稿，每个主要步骤都有记录，很受科技期刊作者的欢迎。本文将就网上投稿过程及作者应该注意的地方予以详细的介绍，供对此感兴趣的中国作者参考。 网上投稿的关键是要

31、做好充分的准备工作。首先，作者对所要投稿的国际英文刊物的投稿需知(GUIDE FOR AUTHORS)要了解清楚，并且按照要求准备好原稿的所有文件。一般科技论文分为回顾性文章(REVIEW ARTICLE)，普通论文(REGULAR/RESEARCH ARTICLE)，快讯(SHORT COMMUNICATIONS)等。不同的文章类型，对原稿的格式要求也有所变化。单就普通论文而言，文章从头到尾的基本格式是：论文的开篇部分，包括文章标题(TITLE)，作者姓名(AUTHORS NAME)(注明通讯作者/CORRESPONDING AUTHOR)，作者单位地址(AFFILIATION)，论文摘要(

32、ABSTRACT)，关键词(KEYWORDS)等；论文的正文部分，包括介绍/引言(INTRODUCTION)，实验方法(METHOD)，实验材料(MATERIAL)，结果与分析(RESULTS AND ANALYSIS)，讨论（DISCUSSION）, 结论（CONCLUSION）等；需说明的是不同的学科，正文的内容和形式会有所增减，图表、公式的数量也会有所不同。正文后的结尾部分有的文章附加致谢辞(ACKNOWLEDGEMENT)，有的则没有，但参考文献(REFERENCE)则是必须的。有的文章还带有附录(APPENDIX)，如全部的实验原始数据、计算机软件程序等。现在有的刊物可以在网上发表的文章中附带电子视听文件(E-COMPONENTS)。如短录像片(VIDEO CLIP)，动画片(SHORT CARTOON)等。