Verified Reviews - Science Advances
Note: Verified reviews are sourced from across review platforms and social media globally.

movee 2022-09-06

1.6 submission
1.9 under evaluation The intermediate dates will be continuously updated, indicating different editors evaluating.
2.1 to review The intermediate dates will be continuously updated.
4.26 to revision Three reviewers recommended major revisions until 6.7.
6.3 From author Also, all authors were requested to complete the Authorship Form before submission.
6.11 to review
8.18 to revision The editor provided two weeks for minor revisions.
8.25 from revision
9.6 Accept - Technical Hold Overall, the editor was very professional, and the three experts chosen were colleagues in the industry. Their questions were incisive and reasonable compared to some previous rejected journals. The only drawback was the slow speed.

simmons mm 2022-08-15

Did the article finally get accepted?

apollotyq 2022-08-13

3.23 to review
4.12 under evaluation
4.15 to review
5.1 to revision
6.17 from revision
6.22 Accept - Technical Hold
6.28 to copyediting
6.30 to external
8.12 online

About the high-speed deformation mechanism of high-entropy alloys: Dynamic response of high-entropy alloys to ballistic impact
Feel free to cite!

esmond 2022-07-28

I asked their staff, but it cannot be deleted; it can only remain in the system.

tttttzzzzz 2022-07-19

13-Jul-2022 Submission
14-Jul-2022 Under Evaluation
19-Jul-2022 Under Evaluation

I don't know how long it will take to be reviewed. Good luck to myself~

yiyi0101 2022-07-11

How many reviewers do you have in total?

yiyi0101 2022-07-11

27. Jun. submit articles
28. Jun. assigned to editor
28. Jun. under evaluation
29. Jun. to review
30. Jun. to review
02. Jun. to review
04. Jun. to review
06. Jun. to review
08. Jun. to review
11. Jun. to review

Can I ask what does it mean to have so many "to review"? Does it mean there are 7 reviewers?...

MG-Physics 2022-07-07

In the field of amorphous physics, the manuscript was submitted at the end of November 2021, and it took 1-2 weeks for the review process. There were two reviewers. After major revisions, the manuscript went through three rounds of modifications and was accepted in early July 2022.
The editor was very responsible, and the reviewers were very professional. They were able to point out our weaknesses and guide us on how to revise and polish the paper.

洛达达 2022-07-03

How do I cancel or delete a new manuscript in the science submission system? I just wanted to take a look at the submission process, so I created one, but now it's always there.

Timothy zhang 2022-06-29

Submission experience
2.4 submission
2.5 under evaluation
2.7 to review
2.8 to review
2.9 to review
2.10 to review
2.21 to review
2.23 to review
2.24 to review
2.26 to review
3.2 to review
3.9 to review
3.19 to review
3.29 revision
5.23 re-submission
5.24 from revision
5.27 under evaluation
5.30 to review
6.2 to review
6.3 to review
6.17 to review
6.20 to review
6.22 to review
6.23 to review
6.23 to review
6.24 to review
6.27 to review
6.28 accept-technical hold

追光者SLJ 2022-06-29

Science sub-journals are impressive without comments. However, the three major journals and their sub-journals mainly focus on the fields of biology, chemistry, and medicine, and are not very friendly towards traditional mechanics. My research direction is multi-energy field coupling and vibration suppression mechanism, which leans towards physics. The overall editor of Science gave the evaluation of "very substantial engineering work that is more suitable for specialized journals" and categorizes it as engineering, leading to rejection within a week. Originally, I submitted it in the direction of applied science and engineering, originating from engineering, extracting mechanisms and applying them in a broader direction. This journal requires passing through three stages: first, the chief editor rejects 60% of submissions, then the assistant chief editor rejects another 60%, leaving only 10 out of approximately 100 articles for external review. Therefore, the key is whether the editors decide to review it or not. It is very difficult for traditional mechanics to be published in comprehensive journals. It would be best if the list of authors includes a renowned foreign expert; otherwise, the chances of being cannon fodder are very high.

其实 2022-06-07

20211125 under evaluation
20211128 editor invited
20211130 under evaluation
20211202 under evaluation
20211203 to review
20211229 to Revision - Review comments received
20220325 From Revision - Revised
20220328 under evaluation
20220329 To Review
20220407 To Review - Time changed, status remains, patiently wait
20220421 To Review
20220424 Under Evaluation
20220426 Under Evaluation
20220427 Accept - Technical Hold
20220511 To Copyediting
20220516 To External

unsw2012 2022-05-16

1st round
1.23 submission
1.25 under consideration
1.30 to review
2.27 under consideration
2.28 revision

2nd round
4.18 from author
4.22 to review
5.15 under consideration
5.16 accept-technical on hold

There are two reviewers and the editor is MIT Prof. Jongyoon Han. The title of our article is "FIDELITY: A Quality Control System for Droplet Microfluidics". Feel free to cite it!

节节高 2022-05-10

Too difficult, it feels even more difficult than Nature Communications...

节节高 2022-04-21

Return for repair, the status from the author has been for more than half a month and I don't know what the situation is...

MMM 2022-04-19

One month for review, the speed is acceptable, hoping for a good outcome!

花椒2 2022-03-10

How about it, has your application been accepted?

花椒2 2022-03-10

Has the manuscript come back? Is there a high chance of rejection for external review? Mine is also under external review.

yi----- 2022-02-25

Submit for review about seven weeks after submission, first review takes about seven weeks, submit revisions after six weeks, second review takes about seven to eight weeks, submit revisions in one day, and receive acceptance one week later.

Timothy Zhang 2022-02-24

It would be perfect if the detailed process of submitting and receiving manuscripts could be listed.

yi----- 2022-02-24

From submission to acceptance, it took a total of 7 months. There were two reviewers who were very professional, meticulous, and responsible.

zhgong007 2022-02-02

What is the final result?

磕盐人 2022-01-24

The requirement for novelty is relatively high, and the influence is also relatively significant. Two years ago, I had a paper accepted, with two reviewers requesting a total of 10 additional experiments. It took 5 months from submission to acceptance.

pper0501 2021-12-27

12.11 to review
12.13 to review
12.20 to review
12.24 to review
12.25 Accept-Technical hold

pper0501 2021-12-08

11-13 Received review comments
12-8 Resubmit

金元宝666 2021-11-14

What's the current situation with Brother Long?

金元宝666 2021-11-14

First time submitting to this journal, sharing the submission process for everyone's reference~
9.29 submitted/under evaluation
10.17 editor invited/under evaluation
10.19 under evaluation
10.20 under evaluation
10.21 under evaluation
10.22 under evaluation
10.22 to review
10.25 to review
10.26 to review
10.27 to review
10.28 to review
10.29 to review
10.30 to review
11.2 to review
11.3 to review
11.5 to review
11.12 under evaluation

pper0501 2021-11-01

OCT-30 TO REVIEW - October 30th for reviewing
Nov-1 to review - November 1st for reviewing

pper0501 2021-10-28

Oct-23 Post
Oct-25 Under evaluation
Oct-28 To review

First time submitting S A, hoping for good luck.

龙云 2021-10-22

Word limit.
At the beginning, when editing, the dates were changed a few times, which should have been changed in editing.
After submission for review, the dates may be updated, possibly due to resubmission after rejection by the reviewer, and the dates may also be updated upon receiving the reviewed manuscript. During revision, there were two reviewer comments, but it is unclear whether the editor provided only two or there were only two reviewers.
During the revision, there is one thing to note, the figure legend should not exceed 300 words and should not be too long. This was not mentioned in the submission requirements, and the formatting editor sent it back for re-modification during the revision.
Also, one more thing, the website often fails to load near midnight, so it is recommended to submit during the day.
This is to provide experience for those who want to submit.
Overall, this journal is too slow. Comrades in a hurry should not submit.

Add your recorded webinar

Do you already have a recorded webinar? Grow your audience and get more views by easily listing your recording on Peeref.

Upload Now

Create your own webinar

Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.

Create Now