Darren Hou 2022-06-29

I have been submitting for a whole year, and there is still no news until now. Speechless.

yb 2022-06-25

How long does the first trial process usually take? I haven't received any updates for over two months.

s_u 2022-06-24

It took three months from submission to acceptance. There is nothing to complain about the review process, it was very professional and the workload was definitely demanding. It is a very good journal. I wonder if I can get it published in the top tier this year.

IamAReader 2022-03-28

The review lasted nearly 10 months, and the reviewers were very professional. The workload and innovation were required, and the articles needed to be relevant to the journal's theme. The review process was quite long, with the first review taking 5 months, which made me anxious, but fortunately it was worth it.
10/12/2018, submitted
01/4/2019, major revision
14/4/2019, submitted the revision
24/06/2019, major revision
15/7/2019, awaiting recommendation
There was another revision in between, and I submitted it...
10/2019

一只不懂学术的咸鱼 2022-03-03

Have you proofread your manuscript? I haven't sent the proofreading letter yet for mine.

mslg 2022-02-20

The reviewing speed is still very satisfactory!
2021.08.16 submitted
2021.10.05 major revision
2021.10.27 submitted r1
2021.11.14 accepted

一只不懂学术的咸鱼 2021-12-23

Overall, it was quite fast. The first round of review took two months, and the major and minor revisions were handled quickly afterwards.

chxifei 2021-11-19

Switched to an IEEE-affiliated journal, and all three experts were minor revisions, quickly accepted.

Shaun 2021-10-08

How should we proceed with the follow-up? Should we modify and then resubmit, or should we switch to a different journal?

Shaun 2021-10-08

The journal has a great reputation. However, the feeling is not good, as it was initially rejected. Furthermore, the reviewer's comments are very unreasonable. The reviewer seems to not understand my method and always speaks from his own perspective. Perhaps his understanding does not align with what I intended to do. Moreover, it is clear that he did not thoroughly read my article. There are many mistakes in his comments. One of my figures is used for comparison, so it is not meant to show any effects. Yet, the reviewer criticized the effectiveness of this figure. This figure is specifically used for comparison, so it is certain that nothing can be observed from it. The reviewer obviously did not read my article and just glanced at the figure before randomly writing this reason. There are a total of five comments, and two of them are unreasonable. The others express a lack of trust in the foundation of my theory.

chxifei 2021-09-15

One review, two experts. One gave a very good evaluation, suggesting minor revisions with almost no issues. The other expert rejected the manuscript, but the editor provided an opportunity for major revisions. We carefully modified the response according to the experts' opinions. However, the second expert still insisted on rejecting the manuscript, and in the end, it was rejected by the editor. It's a bit regrettable.