正文

論文投稿的justification（論文投稿的title怎么填）

發(fā)布時間：2023-06-14 11:05:25 稿源：創(chuàng)意嶺閱讀： 139

大家好！今天讓創(chuàng)意嶺的小編來大家介紹下關(guān)于論文投稿的justification的問題，以下是小編對此問題的歸納整理，讓我們一起來看看吧。

開始之前先推薦一個非常厲害的Ai人工智能工具，一鍵生成原創(chuàng)文章、方案、文案、工作計劃、工作報告、論文、代碼、作文、做題和對話答疑等等

只需要輸入關(guān)鍵詞，就能返回你想要的內(nèi)容，有小程序、在線網(wǎng)頁版、PC客戶端和批量生成器

官網(wǎng)：https://ai.de1919.com。

本文目錄:

等待作者批準轉(zhuǎn)換文件
tie論文送審幾個狀態(tài)
sci 投稿怎么使用the journal template
JMC投稿 cover letter 怎么傳

論文投稿的justification（論文投稿的title怎么填）

等待作者批準轉(zhuǎn)換文件

論文投稿后送審時間要看雜志社的收稿情況，論文投稿后要先等雜志社編輯審稿，如果雜志社收稿量比較大，等的時間也會長一些，收稿量小的話，時間也會短一些，當然不同出版社期刊的投稿方式，過程及狀態(tài)都是有所區(qū)別的，但基本形式大致相同，下面雜志投稿網(wǎng)小編就對此進行介紹，廣大投稿者可以作為參考：
　　1. 等待作者批準的提交
　　在投稿系統(tǒng)里，將稿件以及相關(guān)信息上傳填寫完畢后，狀態(tài)顯示等待作者提交，然后點擊提交，之后是批準提交，文章進入雜志編輯評估階段。該階段主要有兩類雜志編輯對論文進行評估，一類是技術(shù)編輯負責質(zhì)控論文的格式，一類是學術(shù)編輯負責把關(guān)論文與雜志主題是否符合，論文質(zhì)量如何，是否值得送外審，以及也負責將審稿回來的建議上交給總編輯并進行決策文章錄用與否。
　　2.您的論文就是在等待審核狀態(tài)
　　技術(shù)編輯對論文格式進行審閱，如果格式不對或者缺少必要的內(nèi)容等，則會將論文打回修改。這個過程也不會很長，一般幾天左右能夠完成。收到退回修改的郵件和消息后，就需要作者根據(jù)編輯要求對論文進行格式修改，再次提交即可。
　　3.然后就是您的論文在審核中
　　如果雜志編輯認為投稿論文格式符合要求，學術(shù)編輯認為投稿論文主題符合雜志，對論文感興趣，值得外送，這個時候，稿件的狀態(tài)會變更為等待審核，那么意味著文章已經(jīng)推送到了同行評審哪里，這個時間也不是統(tǒng)一的。
　　當然具體您的論文投稿后什么時候能送審，不同雜志的審稿周期差異比較大，從幾天到數(shù)月不等，甚至也有好幾年的。對于大部分學術(shù)期刊而言，從投稿到接收(或拒稿)大概在數(shù)月內(nèi)(2-6個月)可以完成，作者能做的就是提早準備自己的論文，以免耽誤評職，更多詳情可以咨詢雜志投稿網(wǎng)的在線老師

tie論文送審幾個狀態(tài)

13個狀態(tài)。
1、ManuscriptSubmitted（Submittedtojournal）：表示論文已經(jīng)投稿成功。接下來由期刊工作人員檢查論文格式排版、重復率是否符合要求，符合要求的文章會分配給期刊編輯進行處理。
2、Awaitingadminprocessing：意為等待負責的編輯處理。在編輯審稿前，助手負責審查稿件是否齊全，不齊全的話則立即要求作者按要求補充相關(guān)材料。許多期刊會在系統(tǒng)顯示ManuscriptSubmitted時完成該步驟。
3、EditorInvited：這個階段不是所有的期刊都有，這個狀態(tài)是表示論文已經(jīng)轉(zhuǎn)給編輯，正在等待編輯接受。
4、WithEditor：這個狀態(tài)表示編輯已經(jīng)接受負責處理論文，這個時候，編輯已經(jīng)初步看過論文，如果他認為論文適合期刊，就會送交同行評審；如果論文與期刊的范疇不相符或是沒有達到期刊的標準，就有可能在外審前退回給作者，這種時候，狀態(tài)就有可能變成「DecisioninProcess」。在這種情況下，作者都會在幾天之內(nèi)收到拒絕通知。在這一過程中還可能會出現(xiàn)「Editorassigned」，表示稿件已經(jīng)分配給某位主編或副主編負責。
此外，還有可能會出現(xiàn)「EditorDeclinedInvitation」，表示該編輯拒絕邀請，此時編輯會重新分派給其他編輯處理。
5、ReviewerInvited：編輯已經(jīng)送出審稿邀請，等待審稿人接受中。有時候，這個狀態(tài)可能會維持好一段時間后又變回「WithEditor」，這有可能是審稿人拒絕審稿，編輯需要再另外找審稿人。
6、UnderReview（Peerreview）：審稿人正在審稿。此時論文是由同行評審進行外審，因為審稿是無償?shù)墓ぷ骷由闲枰冻鲈S多精力，這個過程需要持續(xù)較長時間，一般為1-2個月。如果被邀請審稿人取消審稿，就會decline，編輯會重新邀請別的審稿人。
同行評審是SCI論文審稿中耗時最久，也是影響雜志社決定最關(guān)鍵的環(huán)節(jié)。
7、RequiredReviewsComplete：表示審稿意見已經(jīng)返回給編輯，等編輯處理。有時候，編輯在看完審稿報告后可能會覺得需要邀請其他審稿人進行審稿。此時，系統(tǒng)的狀態(tài)就有可能再度變成「UnderReview」。
8、DecisioninProcess：表示編輯正在根據(jù)審稿意見文章進行決策。必要的時候，編輯會在此階段與編輯部的其他成員商討，一旦出現(xiàn)這個狀態(tài)，作者一般會在幾天之內(nèi)收到通知。
9、Reject：審稿人看過內(nèi)容或者審稿意見后作出的決定，表示拒絕這篇論文。這種是最常見的狀態(tài)，著名雜志拒稿率可達90%。
10、Majorrevision：需要進行大量修改，不一定意味著接受。提示審稿人評價較好，有機會被接受。一定要認真、嚴格按照意見修改，審稿人稍不滿意稿件也會被拒絕?，F(xiàn)在因為「論文工廠」以及學術(shù)造假等事件，退稿比例越來越高。
11、Minorrevision：需要進行少量修改，原則上確定接受稿件，仍需虛心接受審稿人的意見，進行一對一的修改。
12、RevisedManuscriptSubmitted：意味著作者已經(jīng)遞交修改稿，現(xiàn)等待期刊檢查排版。
13、Accept：意味著編輯對作者的修改很滿意，決定接受稿件。

sci 投稿怎么使用the journal template

SCI
投稿信件模板

一、投稿信

1. Dear Dr. XXX
I
am
sending
a
manuscript
entitled
“
XXXX
”
by
XXXX,
which
I
should
like
to
submit
for
possible publication in the journal of XXXX.
Yours sincerely

2. Dear Dr. XXX
Enclosed is a manuscript entitled “
XXX
” by
XXX, which we are submitting for publication in
the journal of XXX. We have chosen this journal because it deals with XXX. We believe that sth
would be of interest to the journal’s readers.
3. Dear Dr. XXX
Please find enclosed for your review an original research article, “
XXX
” by sb. All authors
have read and approve this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the
integrity of the work. No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. No conflict of
interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and we have attached to this letter the signed
letter granting us permission to use Figure 1 from another source.
We
appreciate
your
consideration
of
our
manuscript,
and
we
look
forward
to
receiving
comments from the reviewers.

二、詢問有無收到稿件

Dear Editor,
We dispatched our manuscript to your journal on 3 August 2006 but have not, as yet, receive
acknowledgement of their safe arrival. We fear that may have been lost and should be grateful if
you
would
let
us
know
whether
or
not
you
have
received
them.
If
not,
we
will
send
our
manuscript again. Thank you in advance for your help.

三、詢問論文審查回音

Dear Editor,
It is more than 12 weeks since I submitted our manuscript (No: ) for possible publication in
your journal. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a
decision. I should appreciate your letting me know what you have decided as soon as possible.

四、關(guān)于論文的總體審查意見

1.
This
is
a
carefully
done
study
and
the
findings
are
of
considerable
interest.
A
few
minor
revision are list below.
2.
This
is
a
well-written
paper
containing
interesting
results
which
merit
publication.
For
the
benefit
of
the
reader,
however,
a
number
of
points
need
clarifying
and
certain
statements
require further justification. There are given below.

3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our
knowledge
of
the
subject
sufficiently
to
warrant
publication
in
PNAS.
We
suggest
that
the
authors try submitting their findings to specialist journal such as XXX.

4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added.

5.
This
manuscript
is
not
suitable
for
publication
in
the
journal
of
–

because
the
main
observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of XXX.
6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will
see,
I
have
made
some
correction
at
the
beginning
of
the
paper
where
some
syntax
is
not
satisfactory.
7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate
the finding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of
someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker.

8. The
wording
and
style of some section, particularly those
concerning
HPLC, need careful
editing.
Attention
should
be
paid
to
the
wording
of
those
parts
of
the
Discussion
of
and
Summary which have been underlined.

9.
Preliminary
experiments
only
have
been
done
and
with
exception
of
that
summarized
in
Table 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so
much variation between assays.

10.
The
condition
of incubation
are
poorly
defined. What
is
the
temperature? Were
antibody
used?

五、給編輯的回信

1. In reply to the
referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that
XXX
One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture
in Figure 1. This has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3,
paragraph 1 (line 3-8) and 2 (line 6-11). These do not affect our interpretation of the result.

2.
I
have
read
the
referee’s
comments
very
carefully
and
conclude
that
the
paper
has
been
rejected on the sole grounds that it lake toxicity data. I admit that I did not include a toxicity table
in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than
an error or omission.

3. Thank you for your letter of XXX
and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript
entitled “
XXX
”. We hav
e studied their comments carefully and have made correction which we
hope meet with their approval.

4. I enclosed a revised manuscript which includes a report of additional experiments done at the
referee’s suggestion. You will see that our original findin
gs are confirmed.

5. We are sending the revised manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised
portion are underlined in red.
6. We found the referee’s comments most helpful
and have revised the manuscript.

7. We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence.

8. Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript is acceptable for
publication in Cancer Research with minor revision.

9.
We
have
therefore
completed
a
further
series
of
experiments,
the
result
of
which
are
summarized in Table 5. From this we conclude that intrinsic factor is not account.

10. We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper.

11.
I
feel
that
the
reviewer’s
comments
co
ncerning
Figures
1
and
2
results
from
a
misinterpretation of the data.

12. We would have included a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been
available.

13. We
prefer
to
retain
the
use
of
Table
4
for
reasons
that
it
should
be
clear
from
the
new
paragraph inserted at the end of the Results section.

論文投稿的justification（論文投稿的title怎么填）

JMC投稿 cover letter 怎么傳

有兩種方式，你選一種：

1、不用coverletter的。直接把你文章具有的意義上傳就好。投稿的時候里面有個選項“justification”

2、cover letter和你的文章一起傳就好了，就用comment to editor上傳，如果沒有這個選項，可以放在manuscript的第一頁！

以上就是關(guān)于論文投稿的justification相關(guān)問題的回答。希望能幫到你，如有更多相關(guān)問題，您也可以聯(lián)系我們的客服進行咨詢，客服也會為您講解更多精彩的知識和內(nèi)容。