ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS RESEARCH

Although the submission result was rejected, the submission experience was still good. Here is a reference for everyone:

6.11 submitted to journal
6.12 with editor
6.13 under review
6.21 1st reviewer complete
6.27 2nd reviewer complete
7.13 3rd reviewer complete
7.13 required reviewers completed
7.16 reject

There were a total of three reviewers. Two of them agreed more and only raised some explanatory questions and suggested additional literature. The opinion of the third reviewer was more sharp, possibly from the industry. They completely questioned the rationality of the research object (based on their design experience, they believed that the research and application of electric boats are not mature, so research based on this is completely meaningless). Indeed, from a practical design perspective, the model may be simplified. I conducted the research from an algorithmic perspective, which had a significant difference from the reviewers' requirements. The associate editor did not provide any suggestions for revision or resubmission, and it was rejected.

I had previously published in EPSR once, and this was my second submission. The review process was much faster than before. Regarding the format, I directly formatted it into a single column (previously it was double column). If I have new articles in the future, I will still try to submit to EPSR. I also hope that everyone can be successful in their submissions!

The handling speed of the journal editor and external reviewers has improved significantly compared to previous years. The first review usually takes between 1.5 to 6 months. There are typically 2 to 4 reviewers assigned, with 2 reviewers for the recently accepted paper and 4 for the previous one. The responses to the reviewers' comments were addressed seriously, leading to a higher acceptance rate during the second review. One of the experts raised a crucial technical issue, which required a major revision of the paper. On average, each response to a question spanned 4 pages. The journal does not have a fixed template, but I prefer using Word with double columns (although single column is also acceptable). During the proofreading stage, the editorial department will convert the paper into a uniform format. The editor will send a track link to the corresponding author to facilitate timely updates on the submission status. Additionally, the later stages of proofreading are quite convenient, and if there is no update on the status for an extended period, it is possible to request an update. Here, I would like to express my appreciation to Elsevier and EPSR.