友情提示:以下期刊信息可能会有更新,仅供参考,请在投稿前自行登录期刊官网仔细核实。
期刊名
Remote Sensing
REMOTE SENS-BASEL
ISSN / eISSN
2072-4292
目标和范围
Remote Sensing (ISSN 2072-4292) publishes regular research papers, reviews, letters and communications covering all aspects of the remote sensing process, from instrument design and signal processing to the retrieval of geophysical parameters and their application in geosciences. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish experimental, theoretical and computational results in as much detail as possible so that results can be easily reproduced. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced.
研究方向
环境科学
地球科学:综合
成像科学与照相技术
CiteScore
7.90
查看趋势图
CiteScore 学科排名
类别 | 分区 | 排名 |
---|---|---|
Earth and Planetary Sciences - General Earth and Planetary Sciences | Q1 | #18/192 |
Web of Science 核心合集
Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) | Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) |
---|---|
Indexed | - |
类别 (Journal Citation Reports 2023) | 分区 |
---|---|
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES - SCIE | Q2 |
GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY - SCIE | Q1 |
IMAGING SCIENCE & PHOTOGRAPHIC TECHNOLOGY - SCIE | Q2 |
REMOTE SENSING - SCIE | Q2 |
H-index
81
出版国家或地区
SWITZERLAND
出版商
MDPI (Basel, Switzerland)
出版年份
2009
年文章数
6349
Open Access
YES
通讯方式
ST ALBAN-ANLAGE 66, BASEL, SWITZERLAND, CH-4052
认证评论
Received first review on July 18, 2022.
Initially, two reviewers provided extensive comments.
On July 23, 2022, the number of reviewers increased to three, and the editor sent an email requesting the manuscript to be revised within ten days and to respond to the reviewers' comments.
Since the status of the reviewers can be seen on the MDPI system, I started preparing additional experiments and improving the manuscript as soon as I received the comments from the two reviewers, so there was still enough time.
Reviewer 1 asked me to conduct physical experiments and provided one or two comments, which were relatively easy to address. Currently, MDPI places great emphasis on having physical experiments, so there is a high probability of rejection if the study is purely simulation-based.
Reviewer 2 had a different perspective from mine, and I did not understand why they reviewed my paper. It seemed like they didn't fully comprehend my research and frequently asked me to cite their own papers in their comments. They listed nearly 15 comments, which I addressed one by one and also referenced the literature they mentioned.
Reviewer 3 carefully reviewed the paper and suggested me to add some theoretical aspects in a few sections, modify the abstract, and address language issues. I replied to each comment and made the necessary revisions.
Received minor revisions on July 28, 2022. Reviewer 2 had no further comments, and Reviewer 3 was no longer involved (probably considered the issues as minor and not in need of further review). Reviewer 1 provided additional comments, suggesting to merge some headings and correct spelling errors. I replied to each comment.
Editor reviewed and revised on July 30, 2022.
Accepted on July 31, 2022.
11/11/2021: Submitted
11/11/2021: Under review
11/22/2021: Major revision
12/1/2021: Resubmitted
12/2/2021: Minor revision
12/2/2021: Accepted
Create your own webinar
Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.
Create NowAsk a Question. Answer a Question.
Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.
Get Started