hhhggg123 2023-08-07

How many days after receiving the OL will everyone receive the subsequent email? Should we proofread first or pay the fee?

hhhggg123 2023-08-07

Hello, congratulations to your friend for having his article accepted. Can I ask some questions about the subsequent payment for OL? 512401294, thank you!

hhhggg123 2023-08-07

Hello, congratulations to your friend for having his article accepted. Can I ask you a few questions about the subsequent payment of OL? Q 512401294. Thank you!!!

hhhggg123 2023-08-07

Hello, congratulations to your friend for having his article accepted. Can I ask some questions about the follow-up payment for OL? Q 512401294, thank you!

hhhggg123 2023-08-07

Hello, congratulations on your friend's article being accepted. My article has also been accepted. Can I consult about the subsequent payment related issues with OL? q 512401294. Thank you!

王清清 2023-08-04

Publish 03 August 2023 03 August 2023 Published
Final Manuscript Decision 19 July 2023 20 July 2023 Manuscript Accepted
Author Revision 10 July 2023 19 July 2023 Author Revisions Complete
First Manuscript Decision 09 July 2023 09 July 2023 Major Revisions Required
Rate Reviewers 09 July 2023 09 July 2023 Reviewer Rating Completed
Peer Review 27 June 2023 09 July 2023 Peer Review Complete
Assign Editor 27 June 2023 27 June 2023 Editor Assigned
Quality Check 27 June 2023 27 June 2023 Quality Check Passed

崔宗宇 2023-08-03

Asked experienced teachers, it is highly likely that they are on vacation abroad.

putong0708 2023-08-02

I submitted on July 1st, but now one is too busy, three are waiting, and it has been half a month past the deadline and they still haven't agreed to review. Are you experiencing the same? Is it because the foreign reviewers are on vacation? Have you sent any reminders?

崔宗宇 2023-07-28

It has been 50 days since the external review started. Two new reviewers have been added, making a total of eight reviewers now. However, most of them are either not too busy or just waiting. Does anyone understand what's going on?

AO__AO 2023-07-17

Two reviewers.
The first reviewer believes that there is no innovation and directly rejected it.
The second reviewer believes that it is highly innovative and can solve some current problems in the field, suggesting some additional experiments. The final decision from the editor was major revision. The second reviewer was too busy to conduct a second review, so another reviewer raised a few issues regarding word usage and, in the end, it was accepted.
Overall, the process took around two months, with the first reviewer causing a delay of one month by not conducting a second review. Nonetheless, the process was relatively fast.

有风度有态度 2023-07-14

This sentence means: "We see that you submitted a version of this manuscript to OSA that was rejected. Please note that Optics Letters does not accept resubmissions from other journals."

EmilyG 2023-06-27

The first submission had two reviewers, one rejected it directly, and the other requested major revisions. The editor decided to reject the manuscript. After making the major revisions, it was resubmitted and now has received a provisional acceptance. I hope for good luck. I want to ask the original poster if there are usually many questions asked after receiving provisional acceptance? What is the probability of final acceptance?

SUXINZHILA 2023-06-14

Finally, the boss asked to revise according to the opinions of the other two reviewers and then submit to OE. In the COVER LETTER, write a well-crafted response to the reviews of the other two reviewers. Then, systematically refute the viewpoints of the reviewer who rejected my manuscript. Surprisingly, it was sent for review and took one month for the review process. Eventually, the minor revisions were accepted.

啦啦啦咯 2023-06-01

How did the original poster handle it in the end? Where did they transfer to?

啦啦啦咯 2023-06-01

One rejection, one minor revision, the article was rejected, the reviewer was very professional, but couldn't understand why they said the article lacks originality, clearly it is highly innovative, and even suggested submitting to Optic Continuum. I searched it, and it is a small journal that has not yet had an impact factor, I felt extremely frustrated and insulted...

啦啦啦咯 2023-05-23

Reviewer 1: Too Busy (May 22, 2023)
Reviewer 2: Too Busy (April 24, 2023)
Reviewer 3: Too Busy (May 4, 2023)
Reviewer 4: Request More Time (May 16, 2023), Complete (May 16, 2023)
Reviewer 5: Agree (May 15, 2023), Complete (May 21, 2023)
Reviewer 6: Waiting, Due (May 18, 2023)

啦啦啦咯 2023-05-23

It has been over a month since submission, and now two people have completed the review. However, it still shows the status as peer review.

Syuhen_ 2023-04-20

A very fast and well-reputed journal. If it undergoes major revisions, it can usually be included within two months.

HFUT_Hefei 2023-04-05

The thesis has been revised back and forth for nearly half a year under the guidance of the supervisor. After that, it was submitted to an optical journal called "OL". As expected, the review process was fast, and it took two months to be published. Everything went smoothly!

HFUT_Hefei 2023-04-05

The editing efficiency is high, and the reviewers are professional. It is good for the optics field to submit to this journal.

GY_L 2023-02-26

My current status is "major revisions required," but why can't I see the reviewer's comments in the system? Were they sent to the editor directly and not displayed in the system? I request an explanation.

luckygua 2022-12-21

Yes, very strict... This length limit is indeed a bit troublesome.

111111234 2022-12-14

Does the OL submission require 4 pages, and does that include pictures?

liuweibboy 2022-11-17

Sometimes reviewers are really ZZ.

ZeadarX 2022-11-09

My paper was accepted at the end of August. Why hasn't it been indexed by SCI on WOS yet in November (it shows that it has been indexed in MEDLINE)? Does anyone have a similar situation as mine?

SUXINZHILA 2022-11-04

It took more than two months to review. A total of three reviewers were found. The first and third reviewers completed the review in about a week, while the second reviewer delayed for over a month. When I returned to edit, it was rejected directly. The first and third reviewers both recommended publication and provided minor revisions. However, the reviewer who delayed me for almost two months directly stated that they do not recommend publication and mentioned a bunch of lack of novelty. Most importantly, they even made a mistake. In the end, the editor rejected it. I guess that reviewer must be an expert, otherwise, the editor would have given me major revisions, considering that my boss is also an expert. They didn't even give me that much credit.

axing 2022-10-24

First review, one major revision, one acceptance, major revision provided by the editor, 10 days for revisions. After submitting the revised manuscript, it was accepted the next day. The whole process took one month, which was too fast.

October 23, 2022: Manuscript Accepted
October 22, 2022: Author Revisions Complete
October 12, 2022: Author Revision
October 11, 2022: Major Revisions Required
October 11, 2022: Reviewer Rating Completed
October 11, 2022: Peer Review Complete
September 20, 2022: Editor Assigned
September 20, 2022: Quality Check Passed
September 19, 2022: Submission Complete

王筱 2022-10-03

Can I ask for your QQ? I would like to consult you about the template for submitting articles. ?

liuweibboy 2022-09-23

The first round of rejection resubmission; rejected again after revision (due to submission error resulting in the reviewers not receiving the revised version); successful appeal; agreed to accept.

405light 2022-06-29

received 8th April 2022;
revised 23rd May 2022;
accepted 30th May 2022;
posted 31st May 2022;
published 15th June 2022