清水Xuu 2021-06-04

I submitted it at the end of last December, and it is still under review now. I have followed up twice in between, but it was of no use. I cried.

hezy 2021-06-04

Submitted in mid-January, still under review.

agtiger 2021-06-03

Has the article number been released now? I submitted it on May 9th, but the article number has not been released yet.

半城~ 2021-05-31

The manuscript number for my manuscript in the second half of February is CMPB-D-21-507. This should be the submission manuscript number. You can refer to it.

半城~ 2021-05-31

The amount of submissions is not determined as soon as the submission is made; it can be seen.

奥特曼打怪 2021-05-31

I have been under review for nearly 5 months and I am about to cry.

bbbao 2021-05-31

Crying, I submitted it in early May, but still haven't been assigned an article number. How can I check the submission amount?

半城~ 2021-05-31

Submitted at the end of February, at that time there were over a thousand submissions in two months. Waited for half a month before being assigned a manuscript number. The first review took less than a month, suggesting minor revisions. The second review took 13 days, and it was accepted for publication. It is said that the impact factor for 2021 is 5.1, and there is a huge number of submissions.

bbbao 2021-05-30

I have been submitting for nearly a month, but have not been assigned an article number yet. I am crying.

Baron.Huang 2021-05-21

3.1 Submission
3.15 With Editor, requesting formatting changes
3.18 Under Review
4.25 Required Review Completed
5.10 Major Revision, 3 reviewers, 2 agreed to accept without any comments, 1 provided 9 comments, which were relatively easy to address, no additional experiments needed
5.19 Revised and currently With Editor
Overall feeling is that the editorial process is too slow, most of the time is spent in the editorial department, reviewers are relatively quick.

大大大泡泡 2021-05-12

Is this open source? How do I submit an article with gold access? There are no other options, and it says it was free until September 31st. Do you charge for publication fees when submitting an article?

xiongda 2021-05-06

Overall, it is not difficult. Careful editing is sufficient.
Submitted on October 15th. One week later, the editor suggested using more recent references and replacing the older ones in the Introduction section. Submitted one day later.
Major revisions on January 15th. There were more than 20 comments from two reviewers, which were addressed individually.
Submitted on February 22nd. After about two weeks, further major revisions were requested (some experiments were not conducted, but the reviewers insisted).
Submitted revised manuscript on March 30th. After two weeks, minor revisions were requested (a small question from one reviewer).
The minor revisions could have been completed in three days, but some things caused delays, so the revised minor version was uploaded two weeks later.
Received acceptance message from editor after five days, on May 1st (the minor revisions were probably not sent to the reviewers again).
Overall, it is not difficult, and the editor's handling speed is fast. Both major revisions were under review within a day, and the timeline mainly depends on the reviewers.

nimalu 2021-05-05

The magazine feels very serious. Two reviewers provided a lot of comments in the first review, and then new reviewers were added in the second review. It took about 7 to 8 months to complete. Both the editors and reviewers feel very serious, and the processing speed is fast. The influence of the magazine feels increasingly significant.

xiongda 2021-04-28

Hello, may I ask if you have assigned the article number now?

crysking 2021-04-19

Do friends know that it has been a week since submission and the article number has not been assigned yet, and the status of the article has remained unchanged? What does this mean?

chenzcha 2021-04-07

7.18 Submission, peer review began within a week.
10.8 Major revision.
11.16 Re-submission for revisions.
04.6 Accepted directly.
The difficulty was not great, the comments were not very challenging. We made the necessary changes and explained the results in the response letter. For the parts that couldn't be changed, we humbly explained the reasoning and it was accepted directly. The second review process was quite long, but the other parts were efficient. There were some respected colleagues among the reviewers (I think I know who they are). The editor seemed quite peaceful, and any minor issues that arose were quickly resolved.