IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid

Thank you to the journal editor and the expert reviewers! This is the second time in high school! The submission timeline is as follows:
(1) 05/04/22: Initial submission of the paper;
(2) 05/11/22: Rejected after initial review: the editor pointed out issues with the expression of the paper;
(3) 05/20/22: Resubmitted after making modifications based on the initial review comments;
(4) 08/09/22: First round of revise and resubmit: there were a total of four reviewers, each with around 10 questions. Some questions were difficult to answer, some required explanations, and others needed additional simulations. Additionally, there was a request to modify the introduction, body, formulas, and overall structure of the paper. The reviewers truly demonstrated their expertise by identifying many issues in the content and expression! So, I carefully consulted relevant literature, replied to each comment diligently, and incorporated the explanations into the paper. Finally, I asked other members of the research group to read and help with the overall manuscript, aiming to eliminate any language and formatting issues.
(5) 09/29/22: Returned for revision after the first review; the revised manuscript and modification explanations combined reached nearly 60 pages.
(6) 11/12/22: Accept; upon receiving the email, I felt pleasantly surprised yet also thought that it all made sense. After all, during those days of revising the paper, I worked diligently, carefully read the comments, searched for references, derived and completed formulas, and made necessary revisions. In short, hard work pays off!

Article submitted on 2018.08.09, the first round of review was completed on 2018.10.26, sent back for revisions on 2019.01.16, the second round of review ended on 2019.03.08, sent back for revisions on 2019.05.04, accepted on 2019.08.01.

A total of 5 reviewers were involved, and it was noticed that one of the reviewers had a background purely in electrical engineering, while I can only be considered to have a background in power grids. The review process took approximately 2-3 months each time, with 60 days given for revisions, which could be extended upon request.

After the first round of revisions, three out of the five reviewers had no further comments. The remaining two reviewers had one proposing new questions and the other requesting a comparative experiment. However, we did not conduct the comparative experiment in the second round.

Finally, it was accepted after three more months.