我接工地 2023-07-29

With this annual submission volume, even a toenail knows the quality. It's just a pitiful self-redemption for the poor. It's better to submit to ASME journals instead, where the submission volume is only around 100 and the review process is strict, although the review cycle is also long.

我接工地 2023-07-29

Very bad, some papers in this journal are really rubbish. As a reviewer, I clearly expressed my rejection, but then they removed me as a reviewer and didn't let me review anymore. Moreover, it seems that there is a green channel for authors with connections. They can even accept something like an experimental report. I won't mention anything further to avoid starting an argument. This journal will become more and more garbage. I suggest changing to another one. There is a reason for calling it "very bad".

X.W. 2023-05-05

The editor is very friendly and serious about their work, able to greatly enhance the quality of the articles.

Ding_ss1 2023-04-24

Why does this journal have a lock symbol next to it on Web of Science? Does it mean it is open access, even though it clearly says it is non-OA?

LIU 2023-04-12

Hello, I was originally planning to submit to this journal, but I noticed that there is a word limit of 3000 words. If I exceed this limit, I need to write an application letter explaining the reasons. Is this word limit strictly enforced? The content of the article I downloaded from the official website is quite substantial.

djt 2023-04-07

Don't be influenced by impact factors and journal rankings. In the field of instrumentation, there are well-established journals with good reputations. Just submit your paper to them if you like. Only when the tide of impact factors, journal rankings, and paper rewards recedes (although it is unknown when), will we know who has been swimming naked.

shihuiym 2023-01-18

Although it only has a rating of 1.8 and is categorized as a fourth-tier journal, it is responsible to say that it is definitely a good journal. The requirements for editors and reviewers are very strict.

Einstan 2022-12-14

Normal, I'm currently looking for reviewers. The editors of this journal are very responsible, and they start looking for reviewers as soon as they receive the submission. If it takes around a month and there is no progress, you can send an email to inquire about the status.

XATU东东 2022-12-03

2022.11.17 Second review returned, the editor raised a question: all authors with fewer than 10 people in the reference list need to be fully listed (because some references were written as et al.). Modify according to the editor's requirements and list all authors.

XATU东东 2022-12-03

2022.8.03: Manuscript submission
2022.9.14: First review returned by 3 experts: Expert 1 raised 6 questions (mostly regarding modifications to figures); Expert 2 raised 5 questions (specific modifications suggested); Expert 3 raised 3 questions (explanatory questions). Responded to and made revisions based on each expert's questions.
2022.10.17: Revised (given two months to make revisions, no progress in the first two weeks, revisions completed and returned in the last two weeks).
2022.11.17: Second review returned: Expert 1 suggests direct publication; Expert 2 suggests minor revisions for publication (also raised two minor questions); Expert 3 suggests direct publication.
2022.11.20: Revised (again given two months to make revisions, completed revisions and returned within three days this time).
2022.12.02: Accepted by the associate editor.
First SCI paper, the journal editor is responsible and the review process is fast. Wishing the journal continued success.

liu 2022-11-18

Big brother, it has been five days since I received the review. I haven't received any emails. Is this normal?

liu 2022-11-18

Review Received. It has been five days in this status. Is it normal, brothers and sisters?

33333333 2022-11-07

The initial draft was submitted on June 28th, and the revision comments were given on August 15th (with a delay of over a week due to one reviewer's refusal to review). Two months were given for revision. I started looking for a job during this period, so I didn't have much time to make changes. Finally, I concentrated on making revisions during the last two weeks. The revised manuscript was returned for re-review on October 14th, and it was accepted on November 7th.

liu 2022-10-14

Boss, I want to ask, this is my first time submitting this, and I didn't pay attention to the image issue, like the resolution issue. When I submitted it, the PDF generated by the webpage showed the images I submitted without any problem. Later, they sent me an email asking me to correct the email issue of other authors, but they didn't mention the images. Currently, the status is Associate editor review. I want to ask if they will reject it later because of this issue?

小韩先生 2022-10-03

What is the cost of his manuscript review fee, please?

liu 2022-09-21

Hello, may I ask if you have a word template for this journal REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS? My WeChat ID is ngtlcc. Thank you very much if you have it!

Edison 2022-05-01

One of the well-known journals in the field of instrumentation and measurement, the review process for my electrical paper was very fast.

- January 14, 2022: Paper submission.
- February 21, 2022: Assigned two reviewers (one reviewer declined, and the editor sent two apology letters).
- February 27, 2022: Received feedback from all reviewers.
- March 3, 2022: Editor returned with a summary (one major revision and one minor revision; this journal allows two months for revisions regardless of the scale).
- March 30, 2022: Submitted revised manuscript (point-to-point revisions).
- April 17, 2022: Received second round of feedback (minor revisions, adjusting chapter sequence).
- April 20, 2022: Submitted revised manuscript.
- April 28, 2022: Associate Editor directly accepted the paper.

Summary: It is important to meet the research requirements of the journal, and a strict level of English proficiency is required. While strong innovation is not necessary, practicality is highly valued. Additionally, both the editor and staff of the journal are very friendly and dedicated. They can be contacted via email anytime for any inquiries. Due to time differences, there may be some delays, but they will respond promptly during office hours. I hope this information is useful to everyone.

Einstan 2022-02-17

Third Review Manuscript Sent to Production - 03-Aug-2021
Decision Sent to Author - 03-Aug-2021
Associate Editor Decision Completed - 03-Aug-2021
All Reviews Received - 30-Jul-2021
All Reviewers Secured - 30-Jul-2021
Potential Reviewer Agreed to Review - 30-Jul-2021
Review Received - 30-Jul-2021
Potential Reviewer Invitation(s) Sent - 30-Jul-2021
Associate Editor Review - 29-Jul-2021
Securing Associate Editor - 29-Jul-2021
Preliminary Manuscript Data Submitted - 28-Jul-2021

Einstan 2022-02-17

Second Revision of the Manuscript Received from Author 28-Jul-2021
Decision Sent to Author 09-Jul-2021
Associate Editor Decision Completed 09-Jul-2021
All Reviews Received 08-Jul-2021
Potential Reviewer Agreed to Review 24-Jun-2021
Review Started 24-Jun-2021
Potential Reviewer Agreed to Review 24-Jun-2021
Associate Editor Review 24-Jun-2021
Submission Check by Editorial Office Completed 24-Jun-2021
Preliminary Manuscript Data Submitted 22-Jun-2021

Einstan 2022-02-17

Revised Manuscript Received from Author 22-Jun-2021
Decision Sent to Author 01-Jun-2021
Associate Editor Decision Completed 01-Jun-2021
All Reviews Received 01-Jun-2021
Review Started 01-Jun-2021
Potential Reviewer Invitation(s) Sent 28-May-2021
Review Started 20-May-2021 06:17:32
Potential Reviewer Agreed to Review 20-May-2021
Potential Reviewers Selected 19-May-2021
Associate Editor Review 15-May-2021
Manuscript Submitted to Editorial Office 15-May-2021

Translation:

Revised Manuscript Received from Author 22-Jun-2021
Decision Sent to Author 01-Jun-2021
Associate Editor Decision Completed 01-Jun-2021
All Reviews Received 01-Jun-2021
Review Started 01-Jun-2021
Potential Reviewer Invitation(s) Sent 28-May-2021
Review Started 20-May-2021 06:17:32
Potential Reviewer Agreed to Review 20-May-2021
Potential Reviewers Selected 19-May-2021
Associate Editor Review 15-May-2021
Manuscript Submitted to Editorial Office 15-May-2021

Einstan 2022-02-17

Internationally recognized journals, such as NMR and STM, have published articles on instruments from this journal. The authors of the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physics also published their work on Astrophysical neutrino telescopes in this journal, which have made significant contributions to the world. The domestic submissions come from universities such as the Chinese Academy of Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Tsinghua University, and Peking University. Although there are only two reviewers, the review process is very rigorous.

amesol 2022-02-10

Hello, fellow student!
Generally speaking, "please review key terms" should indicate that the editor has some suggestions regarding the usage of certain keywords in the text.
Normally, it is necessary to make the necessary modifications and resubmit. If you are unsure about which specific keywords the editor is referring to, you can send an email to inquire and then apply for resubmission after making the necessary changes.

亲爱的甜橙树 2022-02-08

Excuse me, may I ask if it is normal for the submission status to be "Associate Editor Review" for 10 days?
During this period, I received an email requesting me to "please review key terms", but I haven't received any further emails and the status has not changed.
Can I ask the editor about this?
Also, the email was forwarded to me by my teacher, and I processed it through the embedded link.

amesol 2021-12-15

A well-established authoritative journal in the field of instruments and meters. It used to publish some good articles. However, its impact factor is not high, and it is not well received in China. Surprisingly, it has fallen into the fourth quartile in the Journal Citation Reports of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. It may be difficult for it to regain its position in terms of impact factor and ranking in the Chinese Academy of Sciences. It's a bit sad and lamentable.

lkjghf 2021-10-12

7.22 First draft
9.01 Returned for revision (1 minor revision, 1 modification)
9.09 Second draft
10.11 Accepted

tiantianxiangshang11 2021-09-11

Has the original poster's situation changed now? My situation is also like this now, very worrying!!!

浸白新月 2021-08-17

Posted on May 16, 2021
Received reviewers' comments on July 5, 2021, and made major revisions. Both reviewers provided detailed feedback with valuable suggestions to improve the quality of the article. The first reviewer also attached a document with corrections for all the English language errors in the entire text.
Revised on July 12, 2021, addressing each comment individually.
Received reviewers' comments on August 9, 2021, and made minor revisions. The first reviewer suggested that the article can be published, while the second reviewer, being more meticulous, pointed out that two figures in the text needed to be clearer and provided minor revisions.
Revised on August 10, 2021, making adjustments to the two figures as requested by the second reviewer.
Accepted on August 17, 2021.
The entire process took three months, and the reviewers' comments were professional and thorough. This journal is indeed a reputable authority in the field of instrumentation and measurement. Best wishes for the continuous success of the journal.

awei 2021-08-08

Posted on June 1st, received reviewer comments on July 1st. One was rejected, and the other was "publish after revision". The editor gave two months to make the revisions. The revised manuscript was sent back on August 5th, and the current status is "Potential Reviewers Selected". Is the editor now looking for reviewers to review the revised manuscript? Both the independent image and the article have been uploaded as requested. I'm not sure what this situation is. After uploading the revisions, is this the status you usually see?

awei 2021-08-08

Posted on June 1st, received review comments on July 1st. One was rejected, and the other was to be published after revision. The editor gave two months to make the modifications, and the revised draft was returned on August 5th. The current status is "Potential Reviewers Selected." Is the editor rewriting and looking for reviewers? Independent images and articles have been uploaded as required. I'm not sure what the situation is.

晓之以理 2021-05-01

That definitely needs to be polished. Since it has been accepted for revision, make sure to revise it well and there won't be any issues. In other words, even if you submit it to another publication, you still need to ensure the quality of the language.