How to write comments
The general review opinions shall include at least three items:
(1) Briefly describe the research content and significance of the paper, and make an evaluation. As far as it is concerned, we should give affirmation.
(2) According to the contents and results in the article, point out its specific shortcomings and talk about your own views. There are three deficiencies in the article: first, the results of the paper are incorrect or there are major errors; Second, the paper lacks important achievements; Third, the result of the paper is not perfect.
(3) Finally, give your comprehensive evaluation, accept, modify or reject.
Summary of comments on reviewing English papers
The following are the comments given by the editor in the process of English submission, and I would like to share them with you. 12 is insignificant. Each point consists of a summary title and the opinions of representative commentators.
1, the goal and result are not clear.
It should be noted that your manuscript needs to be carefully edited by professional English editors, paying special attention to English grammar, spelling and sentence structure, so that the objectives and results of the research can be made clear to readers at a glance.
2. The research method is not explained or not fully explained.
Generally speaking, there is a lack of explanation for repetition and statistical me.
Research methods.
In addition, explain why the author did these different experiments.
Should provide.
3. Basic principles of research and design:
In addition, there are few explanations about the basic principles of research design.
4. Exaggerated conclusion statement/exaggerated result/inaccuracy;
The conclusion is exaggerated. For example, studies have not shown that
If the polymer formula can avoid the side effects of the initial copper explosion.
5. Clear definition of hypothesis:
A hypothesis needs to be put forward.
6. Basic principles/definition concepts for concepts or tools:
What is the basic principle of film /SBF volume ratio?
7, the definition of research questions:
Trying to make the problems discussed in this paper more clear,
Write a section to define the problem.
8, how to highlight originality and how to write a complete literature review:
This theme is novel, but the proposed application is not novel.
9. Proof of claim, such as a > b, verification:
This algorithm has no experimental comparison with the previously known W. ......
How to write a review opinion?
My previous doctoral thesis was written by reviewers according to the abstract in my thesis, so it's OK to refine it. There should be some innovations written by yourself in the self-criticism book. You can refer to it Leonshane (station contact TA) first makes a brief summary of this paper, pointing out its main clues: research purpose, method, significance, innovation and so on. And then point out one or two biggest problems. If the problem is really fatal, it is recommended to modify it for a long time. Your tutor will check it for you after you finish it. If he doesn't study, I suggest you apply for a new tutor. . . Shuoyeb (station contact TA) 1. General evaluation project: the academic value and application value of the innovation achievements of the paper. The paper reflects the author's basic theory and professional level. 2. Comprehensive evaluation of all reviewers' academic comments on the paper (significance of topic selection, innovative achievements of the paper, academic value and application value, rationality and reliability of experimental results and calculated data, etc.). ) ... 3. Problems, deficiencies, opinions or suggestions in the paper. 2.....LBH535 (sTAtion contact ta) audit opinions should be combined point by point. The surface is the general situation, and the point at least reflects whether the reviewer has read the content carefully. At present, many papers are in the first instance, especially in social sciences. The comments are so general that people feel that they have not read them carefully. Qiu Qu _2002 12 (contact TA in the station) suggested to reply, and then simply write some comments. K 1000 1 (in-sTAtion contact ta) There is also an eight-part essay: The thesis shows that * * * has mastered solid and extensive basic theories and systematic and in-depth professional knowledge in the research field, and has (strong) independent ability to engage in scientific research, and the thesis (innovation) has reached the academic level of doctoral thesis. It is suggested to organize doctoral thesis defense. If there is a prompt in the nono2009 (Station Contact TA) review form, you can write a review opinion according to several items required by the prompt. Songjm 12 (conTAct ta in the station) read the requirements of the first two pages of the evaluation book and write a comment. Is the research question clear, the research goal clear, the method appropriate and the result obvious? Is the workload full and the content substantial? Wait, the best way is to find an old doctoral thesis and copy it down. Stereotyped writing ~ ~
How to write comments
The general review opinions shall include at least three items:
(1) Briefly describe the research content and significance of the paper, and make an evaluation. As far as it is concerned, we should give affirmation.
(2) According to the contents and results in the article, point out its specific shortcomings and talk about your own views. There are three deficiencies in the article: first, the results of the paper are incorrect or there are major errors; Second, the paper lacks important achievements; Third, the result of the paper is not perfect.
(3) Finally, give your comprehensive evaluation, accept, modify or reject.
How to write comments
The general review opinions shall include at least three items:
(1) Briefly describe the research content and significance of the paper, and make an evaluation. As far as it is concerned, we should give affirmation.
(2) According to the contents and results in the article, point out its specific shortcomings and talk about your own views. There are three deficiencies in the article: first, the results of the paper are incorrect or there are major errors; Second, the paper lacks important achievements; Third, the result of the paper is not perfect.
(3) Finally, give your comprehensive evaluation, accept, modify or reject.
According to the above three points, you can give full play to them.
When it comes to peer review, many people think that the so-called peer review is entrusted by journal editors to make a correct evaluation of a paper. Everyone knows this. Why? Many bloggers may have participated in peer review to varying degrees. Then, how do journal editors choose peer reviewers, how do experts review papers, that is, how to correctly evaluate a paper, and whether experts' peer review opinions will be adopted by editors. I think this is a topic that most bloggers are very concerned about.
How to write peer review opinions of experts on sci papers
The theme is the eye of the article and an important part of the article to convey important information. Being at the top of the article structure, the title of the article will directly affect the reviewer's first impression of the article. The basic requirements of the proposed topic are: on the basis of accuracy, it should be eye-catching and comfortable. It can be vivid, vivid, concise, unique, neat and so on. In short, it is best to stimulate the reader's interest in reading, or to make him feel refreshed.
How to write peer review opinions on engineering articles in English?
Peer review of engineering papers
Comments on engineering papers
Peer review of engineering papers
Comments on engineering papers
How to write peer review opinions in English?
E shouted. In the cheers of the ship, two ships
How to write comments
Hello! ordinary
Is it of practical or theoretical significance to study this problem?
Is it clear about the current situation of this problem at home and abroad?
Is the argument clearly stated, novel or creative?
Is the argument sufficient and well-founded?
Whether the format is standardized, such as drawings, tables, formulas and words.
How to write a paper that receives comments from English reviewers?
(1) correctness: the persuasiveness of the argument is rooted in the correct reflection of objective things, which in turn depends on whether the author's position, viewpoint, attitude and method are correct. If the argument itself is incorrect or even absurd, no amount of arguments can convince people. Therefore, the correctness of the argument is the minimum requirement of the paper.
2 Significantness: What is for and what is against should be very clear, and it must not be ambiguous or ambiguous.
Novelty: the argument should be as novel and profound as possible, which can transcend other people's views. It's not repeating other people's platitudes, nor is it irrelevant and general. It should be as unique and novel as possible.
How to write the review opinions of English scientific papers?
1. Originality and uniqueness are the life of the paper. As Academician Zou Chenglu pointed out in Re-discussion on Scientific Ethics, papers published in international core journals should, in principle, be new observation and experimental facts described for the first time in the world, concepts and models proposed for the first time, and equations established for the first time, including existing main observation (experimental) facts.