Entropy

Undergraduate student, computer vision
23.4.12 Submitted
23.4.13 Under review
23.4.30 Pending major revision (21 comments in total from three reviewers, with the last two reviewers requesting additional references. The first two reviewers' questions and comments were relatively mild, while the third reviewer's were more critical)
23.5.5 Received comments from the fourth reviewer. The tone and questions seem unfavorable, clearly coming from someone knowledgeable in the field. They raised 8 challenging points, requiring the inclusion of 4 references and additional algorithm comparison experiments. I requested an extension for the revision from the assistant editor. The editor was patient and kind, granting an extension until 5.18 (originally expected to be around 5.10, considering 4.30 plus 10 days).
23.5.16 Submitted revised manuscript. It took more than half a month to make changes, including many additional experiments, especially to address the requests from the fourth reviewer. However, these changes indeed improved the quality of the paper, which went from 13 pages in the initial draft to 18 pages. I wrote a thorough response letter, totaling 21 pages (being an undergraduate student, I felt the need to be humble and answered many questions in detail, hehe).
23.5.19 Pending minor revision. Reviewers 1, 2, and 3 all agreed to accept the paper (Reviewer 1 did not provide a second-round comment, while Reviewers 2 and 3 mentioned that the paper had been carefully revised and could be accepted in its current form). Reviewer 4 raised three minor issues.

23.04.10 resubmitted
23.04.23 pending minor decision
23.04.29 resubmitted
23.05.02 pending minor decision
23.05.07 resubmitted
23.05.09 accept (Paid 2000 enamel, 14,750 RMB)
23.05.09 pending English
This journal does not require code submission, but some reviewers are not very friendly, and some even reject for the sake of rejection (which I encountered).
Reviewer 3 is particularly difficult, but fortunately Reviewers 1 and 2 agreed to accept. The whole process took a long time, going through four rounds of review and three rounds of revisions (because Reviewer 3 kept holding on). The reviewer's level is still worthy of recognition, with a high level of expertise. Initially uploaded 21 pages, and after acceptance, it became 28 pages.
PS: Reviewer 3 seems to be a statistics major, so statistics students should take note (this reviewer is a reviewer in the system).