搬石头的海 2023-05-05

Domestic journals, must be supported!

szx996 2023-03-27

Received 5 December 2022
Received in revised form
26 January 2023
Accepted 8 February 2023
Available online 28 February 2023
Two months, four reviewers have accepted.

永强儿o 2023-02-16

221202投 - Submit
221203外审 - External review
221219审回 - Review returned
230108修回 - Revised
230210审回 - Review returned
230216修回 - Revised
230216录用 - Accepted for publication

This journal has a high efficiency, especially for the second round of revisions. We submitted at noon and it was accepted in the afternoon. The two reviewers were meticulous and their feedback greatly helped improve the quality of the paper.

科研小杨424 2022-11-13

Has anyone recently invested? Is the recent speed fast? I see in the comments that everyone is saying it's slow, so I want to avoid any risks.

YYlll666 2022-05-19

Article history:
Received 3 January 2020
Received in revised form 22 March 2022
Accepted 5 April 2022
The review process was very fast, and the editor handled it quickly. The first SCI article went smoothly. The comments from both reviewers were very helpful.

枫继续吹 2021-07-27

May 18, 2021, submitted
Jun 28, 2021, revised
Jul 23, 2021, accepted

The manuscript review process went smoothly, and the comments provided were very insightful, clearly indicating that the reviewer was knowledgeable in the field. I would like to express my gratitude to the reviewing experts and the editing teachers, and I wish the journal continued success.

哈少 2021-07-03

By the way, after the second review, two out of the three reviewers have agreed to publish. The one who disagrees is still there nitpicking, giving the impression as if they hold a grudge. The issues they raised are indeed valid, but such problems do not exist in our article; they just want to find fault.

哈少 2021-07-03

Three reviewers reviewed it for five months, and then a fourth reviewer was added. In the end, the editor rejected it! It's really heart-wrenching. The work we did was about granular phase field coupling, which is already quite difficult. We not only had innovation but also substantial content. We provided detailed responses to more than twenty comments. Among them, one reviewer who disagreed always nitpicked and insisted on us verifying things that cannot be verified. It took five months, and the editor said he had to reject it. The first review alone took three months, and the process was already slow. I suggest everyone to consider it carefully!