Clair 2021-03-03

I haven't even learned the basics of Chinese language well.

似水流年 2021-03-01

It's unbelievable that someone would use this kind of journal to evaluate academic titles like professor or doctorate. Even undergraduate students wouldn't bother publishing in such low-quality magazines. It seems like being included in the blacklist of journals. If this kind of work is considered a representative piece, it's simply a big joke.

LHX99 2021-02-28

Recording the first SCI, IEEE Access has a mixed reputation, but let's consider it as practice. Hopefully, in the future, we will be able to publish in more and better journals.
First submission on December 6, 2020.
Review process started on December 8, 2020.
Feedback received on January 19, 2021, with both reviewers recommending rejection and resubmission. The editor also rejected it for resubmission.
Second submission on January 25, 2021.
Review process started on February 1, 2021.
Feedback received on February 24, 2021, with acceptance.
Payment made on February 26, 2021.
Early access available on February 27, 2021.

LHX99 2021-02-27

How can you tell?

扣群616873871 2021-02-27

The journal controls the amount of articles published.

seagull 2021-02-25

Submitted on January 19th, it is still under review. Should I send an email to inquire about it?

^冬日暖阳^ 2021-02-25

It has been nearly six weeks for me too. Is it because of the Chinese New Year holiday that some reviewers haven't returned to school and couldn't reply promptly?

hyh007 2021-02-25

I am like this too, what's going on?

chickchen 2021-02-24

It feels like the classmate "Pomegranate Boy under the Pomegranate Tree" is being a bit overly anxious. The teacher's statement was very objective. Has your school issued any policies? If not, there's no need to worry. Moreover, even if a few universities have implemented policies, they most likely do not affect the evaluation of job titles and awards. Graduating students should still have no problems.

纳维 2021-02-24

A bona fide trash journal, many people surprisingly use it to evaluate professional titles. It has already become a blacklisted journal.

相顾无言y 2021-02-19

The first SCI paper in my life.
Submitted on January 16, 2021.
Revised on January 28, 2021, with 3 reviewers' comments: 2 minor revisions and 1 rejection. The editor suggested resubmitting after major revisions.
Revised and resubmitted on February 8, 2021.
Accepted on February 14, 2021.
I consider the first SCI paper as a practice for me to gain experience.

石榴树下石榴娃 2021-02-18

After being alerted, I am still quite worried. Now is the time to adjust my mindset and start planning how I can complete my thesis with quality.

momo198 2021-02-16

Submission experience:
2020-11-09 Submitted;
2020-11-12 Under review;
2020-11-21 First review returned, 3 reviewers, 1 reject (updates required before resubmission), 2 accept (minor edits), AE reject resubmission after modification;
2020-12-01 Resubmitted after modification;
2020-12-03 Under review;
2020-12-17 Second review returned, 4 reviewers, 1 reject (do not encourage resubmit), 3 accept (minor edits), AE reject resubmission after modification;
2020-12-25 Resubmitted after modification;
2021-01-14 Third review returned, 2 reviewers, 1 reject (updates required before resubmission), 1 accept (minor edits), AE reject resubmission after modification;
2021-01-29 Resubmitted after modification;
2021-02-08 ACCEPTED.

momo198 2021-02-15

Haha, I received the AC on the 28th of the twelfth lunar month!! Had a great year. It took 4 attempts before it was finally delivered...

haoxu 2021-02-15

I think the opinions raised by the second reviewer are very representative: (1) Applying mature algorithms to a new field, is this considered innovative? (It depends on how similar the research in that field is and whether there are substantial new discoveries/new insights. If not directly rejected, you can write more in the discussion section, compare more with the conclusions of similar publications, and provide more insights.) (2) Using only artificial data for simulation, does this lack effort? (Because data collection is an important part of contribution, I think it is better to try to find some data if possible. If there are no open-source data available, you can check the appendices of some people's doctoral dissertations or email authors to see if you can obtain some data).

吃瓜不嫌事大 2021-02-12

Received air-conditioner on the first day of the lunar new year! Wishing everyone a great year, hehehe.

xixi123456 2021-02-10

I see you're looking for trouble. So many people have said that graduation is not affected, it mainly depends on the quality of the thesis. The quality of the thesis directly determines whether you graduate or not. Yet, here you are, talking nonsense! And if you're going to talk nonsense, you should at least have a basis. Even if you're affected by the warning, there should still be a time limit, right? Are you saying that what happened before the warning doesn't count? So all the hard work that has been done is wasted because of an unpredictable experimental document? Also, how about showing the article and seeing how it was written? It's irresponsible to blindly follow the twisted logic of published reviews and shamelessly defend oneself! If the experts are so irresponsible that they judge a journal at first glance, then we will go through the legal process and demand a public trial for the thesis! We may not be able to do anything about the incompetent research group and the administrators who only care about their own interests, but we still have confidence in our work! @zhangsan

秋风暖暖 2021-02-09

One reviewer provided minor revisions, one reviewer provided rejection with encouragement to resubmit, and one reviewer directly rejected the paper and discouraged resubmission.

The feedback from the reviewer who directly rejected the paper is as follows: "The method addresses the typical problem of this kind of diagnosis. The proposed method seems promising and showing better performance. My main concern regarding this paper is its suitability to this journal. The method is a variation of another known method, and the known methods have been published for many years and for the same work, thus the novelty of this work is poor."

Can anyone guide me on how to respond to reviewer 3?

上岸 2021-02-08

Does the master's degree not allow passing either?

rdqs123 2021-02-08

Upload the final version, let the editor format it, and then proofread it. At this point, it was discovered that the "receive" time and "accept" time at the top row were actually taken from the last submission to acceptance time. For example, in this article, it was written that it was received on January 26, 2021, and accepted on February 4, 2021, making it seem like it took less than 10 days. However, the resubmissions before that are not counted. Therefore, one cannot rely on this first row of time to speculate on the review cycle for access (although compared to other journals, having three reviews in two months is considered quite fast; and if the article really has no issues, it would be even faster to be accepted in one go).

rdqs123 2021-02-08

2020.12.1 First submission
2020.12.23 Returned with revision comments after 23 days. There were a total of 3 reviewers, 2 rejected (update required before resubmission), and 1 accepted with minor edits. After making the suggested edits, the manuscript was resubmitted.
2021.1.15 Revised and resubmitted with a response letter.
2021.1.25 Returned with revision comments after 10 days. Only 2 reviewers provided feedback, both of whom had previously rejected the submission. One reviewer accepted with minor edits, while the other rejected (update required before resubmission). The manuscript was resubmitted after making the suggested edits (although usually only one resubmission is allowed, it appears that the editor may have forgotten as a new editor was assigned, but the previous submission number was mentioned during the submission).
2021.1.26 Continued with revisions and resubmitted with a response letter.
2021.2.1 Accepted with the same 2 reviewers as before, both accepting with minor edits. In reality, no specific comments were provided.

niwangze 2021-02-07

12.22 First submission
2.1 Received review comments, both reviewers accepted (minor edits)
Due to a few minor issues raised by reviewer 1, the editor requested a resubmission
2.6 After completing the revisions, second submission.

吃瓜不嫌事大 2021-02-07

I suggest Zhangsan to announce the name of the school~ It seems to be a non-Double First Class or a low-ranking 211 university.

小鱼儿 2021-02-07

The upstairs is really boring. Every comment is replied to, but why didn't I see you leaving a message in other engineering warning journals? Go and check out the recent early access papers. Papers from Tsinghua University, Wuhan University, Zhejiang University, and Huazhong University of Science and Technology are all there. What are you trying to show off here? Or, as the saying goes, which prestigious university are you from? I want to know. This question doesn't involve any privacy, right? If there is such a school that openly denies it, just say it, and everyone can avoid a pitfall.

zhangsan 2021-02-07

Our college teachers clearly stated that the ones on the warning list cannot be considered as research achievements. It's not that we don't want him to count. We would be delighted if he could just write a chapter of a major paper that can be classified as a top-tier paper in the second zone. However, now, if blind reviewers see "access", they will reject it. Even having one "c" would be considered a failure.

zhangsan 2021-02-07

But blind review is very difficult. If you write "access," you will fail.

zhangsan 2021-02-07

But still ended up on the warning list...
Can't graduate.

zhangsan 2021-02-07

No matter what, it cannot change the fact that it has been listed on the warning list of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. If you want to graduate, it is recommended not to submit to this journal. The blind review teacher will directly give it a "C" grade upon seeing this paper.

Being deceived by this journal, now the mini paper is missing a chapter, so quickly write something else and add it to fill the content.

上岸 2021-02-03

The text "修改了两次才录用" translates to "Was hired after two modifications."

吃瓜不嫌事大 2021-02-02

If you resubmit, the submission system will have options. I filled in my previous ID, and I also wrote in my cover letter thanking for the opportunity again.