JoTy 2021-12-23

6.20 Submission
One week later awaiting scores
10.15 Major
11.22 Return
12.22 Accept
The efficiency is quite high. There were a total of three reviewers, including two junior colleagues, and their feedback was very professional and helpful for the paper.

奋斗的研狗啊 2021-12-22

8.06 submission
In the middle: assignment of reviewers, additional reviewer assignment, around September entering "awaiting review scores"
Late November "awaiting AE recommendation", one week later it changed to "awaiting review scores" again
On December 21st, I followed up, and today it changed to "awaiting AE recommendation"
I don't know if arbitration has been involved, feeling anxious, don't know when the results will be announced.

Schrobine 2021-12-21

8.19投 - Submitted on August 19th
11.12转AE评审 - Transferred to AE review on November 12th
12.14返大修 - Returned for major revisions on December 14th

oukan 2021-12-20

It has been a while since it changed to "awaiting scores", and now there is another change in the status. On 12-19, it became "Awaiting AE Recommendation".

nyannko 2021-12-20

May I ask if there is a requirement for a cover letter when reapplying? Also, what is the maximum length in pages for the submitted revised draft?

寻乌 2021-12-20

Hello, OP. Mine is also "under revision". It has been almost half a month since selecting a reviewer. Has your status been updated?

这个注册过吗？ 2021-12-17

Hello, did your status only change to "awaiting reviewing scores" on December 15th? Or has it been in this status for a long time?

relax213 2021-12-15

It has been 17 days and there is still no result.

CBJ 2021-12-15

Hello, may I ask how many days until there are results?

oukan 2021-12-15

2021.10.08 Post, 2021.12.15 awaiting reviewing scores.

relax213 2021-12-14

I have been waiting for almost 3 weeks, T_T, without any news, and I don't know what's going on.

夏目家的猫 2021-12-14

2021-11-30 Submission
2021-12-7 Under Review

Talusul 2021-12-13

There are many TII deep learning papers, but the theoretical depth is generally not good. There are too many "building block" and "permutation combination" type of papers.

kamin 2021-12-13

Hello, I would like to ask, is it still required to keep the revised manuscript within 8 pages?

Mitch 2021-12-07

Hello, I would like to ask if this journal submission requires 8 pages? Do these 8 pages include the abstract and references?

relax213 2021-12-02

Hello, may I ask how long it takes for you to know the result of the manuscript from AE to EIC?

relax213 2021-12-02

How many more days until it will be submitted to EIC, it has been 4 days already, waiting for AE recommendation?

SCI点评专家 2021-12-01

The host is reviewing manuscripts very quickly. How many reviewers are there? Currently, the manuscripts I have submitted have been under review for at least 5 months, with no end in sight...

投稿不拒 2021-11-30

2021-8-13 Submission
2021-11-15 Major Revision
2021-11-30 Selecting Reviewers

GaoXH 2021-11-24

I would like to ask a question for my first submission. During the initial review process, I was asked to provide a few recommended reviewers. I'm wondering what is the purpose of this?

GaoXH 2021-11-24

May I ask, what is the purpose of filling in the "recommended reviewers" when submitting the manuscript?

wtj051 2021-11-18

Are there any experts who have submitted a review before? I have chosen the special section, but the editor Lisa requires a limit of 30 references, which is causing me a lot of distress... Will there be any reference limitations if I submit a paper to SoA?

军 2021-11-05

Let me compare these three methods. I searched for several articles, and they all turned out to be written by the same author, and they were not published in the TII journal. The first reviewer did not make it clear, so how would I know which one to cite? Moreover, the quality of these three papers is just average. In my manuscript, I have already compared and analyzed six different methods, all of which are relatively new. Do I have a problem with my paper if I don't cite or compare these three articles? How can a reviewer blatantly demand authors to cite their own papers? What's even more absurd is that the editor-in-chief and associate editor agreed with the reviewer's opinion!!! I have no choice but to comply, so I compared one of the methods and cited these three articles. Now I have received the revised manuscript, and the outcome is uncertain... (I hope it's just my dirty thoughts, that the first reviewer is not the author of these three papers and simply appreciates them, I really hope so.)

军 2021-11-05

The second review took two months, and the other reviewers had no comments. However, the first reviewer made a request. I have attached the original text below:
Please compare the proposed method with thermal fault diagnosis methods "Ventilation Diagnosis of Angle Grinder Using Thermal Imaging", vibration analysis "Novel Convolutional Neural Network (NCNN) for the Diagnosis of Bearing Defects in Rotary Machinery", and acoustic analysis "Fault diagnosis of angle grinders and electric impact drills using acoustic signals".

军 2021-11-05

Here is a bit of rant, for those who are interested, please prepare a seat and a drink. The feedback from all three reviewers is quite good. The first reviewer gave several suggestions that implied a comparison with thermal imaging diagnostic methods. At least three of their comments were related to this topic. The experimental data in the manuscript only involved vibration and not thermal imaging, and the existing equipment cannot collect such data. I wondered if the reviewer was hinting at me to cite their article? So, I searched for similar articles in the TII journal and cited five relevant articles. Maybe my thoughts are dirty!!!

军 2021-11-05

Here is a bit of rant. For those who are just here to watch the show, get your seats and snacks ready. The suggestions given by the three reviewers are quite good. The first reviewer gave several suggestions implying a comparison with thermal imaging diagnostic methods. At least three suggestions in the manuscript were about this topic. The experimental data in the manuscript only involved vibration, not thermal imaging, and the existing equipment couldn't collect it either. I thought maybe the reviewer was hinting at me to cite his article? So, I looked for similar articles in the TII journal and cited five relevant ones. Maybe I have a dirty mind!!

军 2021-11-05

Recording the review status:
2021-5-9 submitted
2021-5-10 inviting reviewers
2020-6-15 awaiting reviewer scores
2021-7-11 awaiting ADM recommendation
2021-7-13 awaiting co-EIC decision
2021-7-19 Major Revision (deadline 40 days), three reviewers, 1st reviewer had 10 questions, 2nd reviewer had 4 questions, 3rd reviewer had 2 questions.
2021-8-30 submitted (carefully revised, deadline for response)
2021-8-30 inviting reviewers
2021-8-31 awaiting reviewer scores
2021-10-24 Major Revision (deadline 40 days, the 1st reviewer made a request, not a question, further details provided, resulted in major revision)
2021-11-2 submitted
2021-11-2 inviting reviewers
2021-11-5 awaiting reviewer scores (unknown outcome)

Chenliang Liu 2021-11-03

After the second review, it first changed to "Inviting reviewers" and today it has become "Waiting for Reviews". I am not sure what it means.

sochi 2021-10-29

The first time was a revision and resubmission, and the second time an additional reviewer was added, making it a total of four reviewers, and they provided feedback for major revisions. Among the feedback received, two reviewers had no issues, one reviewer had minor issues, and another reviewer raised several significant concerns. After I responded to the reviewers' comments, the status changed from "awaiting reviewer scores" to "waiting for reviews" (not sure if there were any other intermediate statuses). What does this mean? Was another reviewer added?

sochi 2021-10-29

The text translates to:

"TII was resubmitted after the first revision, and for the second time, it was sent back for major revisions with the addition of a reviewer. After resubmission, it changed from 'awaiting reviewer scores' to 'waiting for reviews'. What does this mean?"