electrochemguy 2022-01-06

The Zhihu sightseeing group passed by, that article on the synthesis of qigong ass, is simply a wonderful piece to appreciate, and it can actually be quoted. And no one will sarcastically refer to ass... Even those of us who work in materials know that this is a major journal. My junior brother publishes four or five articles a year, basically just randomly choosing a topic and submitting an article (for example, dividing one reaction into several articles). Just because a big shot has published in ass doesn't mean it's a good journal. Nowadays, most of the better research groups in Europe, America, and China are quite disdainful of this journal. On the contrary, some second and third-tier universities in China inexplicably treat it as a treasure just to improve their ranking.

科研小白一个 2022-01-06

Could you please share your ORCID so that we can have a look at how many NCS papers you have published? We are curious to see what achievements and expertise you have.

twhtiger 2022-01-06

A level 2 associate professor, from a 985 university, a first-class university. The professor has published papers in journals such as JACS, AM, and Nature sub-journals. They have also published several papers in these journals. Do you also think that this professor is ruining their career and their level is quite low? On the contrary, industry professionals recognize their achievements. It's better not to speak in absolutes. Since they are classified as a first-tier journal, they surely have their own unique qualities. If we deliberately seek to criticize and belittle, it is inevitable that there will be a little bitterness and negativity.

二七三一 2022-01-06

Even last year, Applied Surface Science published an article claiming to use Qi Gong to synthesize materials. There is another article with Chinese characters still present in the images, indicating that the article was obviously machine-translated and the author forgot to translate the content of the images. If you are interested, you can message me privately and I will share the link to that article.

If you unfortunately have your manuscript published in ASS (Applied Surface Science), then good luck to you. To exaggerate a bit, in the eyes of some catalysis colleagues in Europe and America, this journal belongs to the level of "destroying one's career with just one publication".

However, this journal does have a significant influence, as everyone likes to use it as a joke. Especially the theoretical and computational articles inside, with various basic errors, violating the conservation of energy, resembling pseudoscience. It's quite relaxing to read.

二七三一 2022-01-06

The average level of this magazine is easily recognizable by surface catalysis experts. It's not interesting to deceive oneself. Many of the experimental and computational articles on surface catalysis inside are disastrous (there is even one claiming to synthesize materials using qigong; if you don't believe me, PM me and I'll send you the link haha).

Furthermore, this magazine has a very poor reputation among surface catalysis peers abroad. To exaggerate a bit, it has reached the point of "publish one article, ruin your career."

二七三一 2022-01-06

The surface catalysis calculations in Applied Surface Science are simply disastrous. The magnetic systems do not exhibit magnetism, the transition states do not converge, the +U term is not included, and the force convergence is set to 0.2 eV/A in the articles, which are abundant in every issue. The computational studies published in the journal often claim certain pathways without providing any comparisons. In terms of experiments, the journal accepts many ultra-high vacuum (UHV) and electrocatalysis studies with high uncertainty, yet without even an error bar. Many articles of poor quality that cannot even reach the fourth quartile are published in ASS.

Foreign peers in the field of surface catalysis strongly resist this journal, as they believe that publishing an article in it can greatly affect their reputation. For instance, a friend collaborated with a catalysis materials expert from the Max Planck Institute and submitted an article to ASS. After receiving the submission email, the expert was very angry and directly requested the author to withdraw the manuscript and submit it to another journal.

Furthermore, this year the self-citation rate of this journal is outrageously high, and its impact factor is supported by some reviews. To be objective, the journal is only at the level of the fourth quartile. It is astonishing that it has been elevated to the first quartile in China. It is truly incomprehensible.

清风浅 2022-01-05

If a second reviewer cannot be found, the editor may ultimately make a decision based on the opinion of only one reviewer. It depends on the editor.
The results of your first review are already available, and I don't think there is a high probability of finding a new reviewer for the second round.

MinTong Ma 2022-01-04

Hello, OP. The editor currently has only provided comments from one reviewer, asking for revisions to be completed within the specified deadline. However, in principle, at least two reviewers' comments are required. Have you ever encountered this situation? I wonder how much longer it will take to receive the second reviewer's comments.

MinTong Ma 2022-01-04

Hello OP, currently the editor has only provided feedback from one reviewer and asked for revisions to be made within the specified deadline. However, in principle, it is necessary to have feedback from at least two reviewers. Have you encountered this situation before? I wonder how long it will take to receive the second reviewer's feedback.

MinTong Ma 2022-01-04

Original: 楼主，你好，编辑目前只给了一个审稿人的回复意见，让在规定期限内改完，但是原则上至少需要两个审稿人回复意见。楼主有没有遇到这种情况。不知道还能等多久才能收到第二个审稿意见。
Translation: Hi OP, the editor has currently provided feedback from only one reviewer, requesting revisions to be completed within the specified deadline. However, in principle, at least two reviewer opinions are required. Have you encountered this situation before? I wonder how much longer it will take to receive the second reviewer's feedback.

MinTong Ma 2022-01-04

Hello, OP. The editor has currently provided feedback from only one reviewer, asking for revisions to be made within the given deadline. However, in principle, at least two reviewers' opinions are required. Have you encountered such a situation? I wonder how much longer it will take to receive the second reviewer's feedback.

MinTong Ma 2022-01-04

Hello, the editor has currently only provided comments from one reviewer, but in principle, it requires at least two reviewers' comments. Have you encountered this situation as the original poster? I wonder how long it will take to receive the second reviewer's comments.

MinTong Ma 2022-01-04

Hello, the editor has currently only given feedback from one reviewer, asking for revisions to be completed within the designated timeframe. However, in principle, feedback from at least two reviewers is required. Have you encountered this situation before? I wonder how long it will take to receive the second reviewer's feedback.

opm 2022-01-03

Say it again, I never voted.

hAhAhAhAhwa 2022-01-02

If you are rejected, does it mean you are even more useless? Being rejected by this journal as well.

opm 2021-12-31

I haven't submitted it before. Our direction for this journal is quite sluggish, like a 2.5 district.

snn1412 2021-12-27

Why did you choose to invest?

opm 2021-12-27

Without blowing or blackening, this journal is very disappointing.

小博哇。。。 2021-12-27

I waited for 70 days for the first review, and the "under review" status changed 4 times. The last five reviewers had 19 questions, which required major revisions that took two months. After waiting for half a month, I made minor revisions and resubmitted it at 10 PM in the evening. It was accepted the next day at 6 PM in the afternoon. It was submitted on 6th October and accepted on 15th November.

tian 2021-12-25

No rush, just wait slowly.

tian 2021-12-25

My previous one also went through many changes under review, no rush, just wait patiently.

hubugeorge 2021-12-25

Upstairs and downstairs are all experts, worshiping... It has been more than 40 days since submission, and the status has changed twice from "Under Review". The latest update is that the associate editor from the United States said that it was not easy to find a willing reviewer, so we have to wait. Hopefully, good luck will come. Surface engineering is indeed difficult, and journals heavily rely on catalysis, environment, and other popular topics to increase their impact factor. As a result, the number of articles on surface engineering is decreasing. I don't expect acceptance, but I hope for a major revision opportunity, which would be deserving of the reputation of this top-tier journal!

Goodwill 2021-12-24

The journal ranked first in the field of coatings and membranes. In the field of surface engineering and surface science, many experts often cite "Applied Surface Science" as their representative work. I just read a few classic papers in the field of coating surface engineering: "Construction of mechanically durable superhydrophobic surfaces by thermal spray deposition and further surface modification," Applied Surface Science, 2015. "Effect of surface topological structure and chemical modification of flame sprayed aluminum coatings on the colonization of Cylindrotheca closterium on their surfaces," Applied Surface Science, 2015. Surface engineering and surface science are the specialties of this journal. There are too few journals with such specialties.

hhjwhy 2021-12-24

There are not many articles in the field of journal coatings anymore, especially unfriendly to traditional coating fields. Relying on high citation rates of energy and chemistry articles, the impact factor has rapidly increased, making it the highest impact factor in the coating field, so it is normal to become a first-tier journal. It can only be said that a large number of Chinese editors in the editorial department have mastered the rules of the game. Now it is considered a comprehensive journal, and the subcategory of film materials is virtually non-existent.

别影响我打酱油 2021-12-24

I'm about to vomit from what you said. Are you sent by the Chinese Academy of Sciences? You just randomly choose a small field and claim to have surpassed it. Not to mention the countless watered-down nano-composite materials published in this journal.

Goodwill 2021-12-23

The classification of the Chinese Academy of Sciences is still reasonable. It depends on the influence within the field of surface engineering, coating, and film. Appl. Surf. Sci. ranks first in the "coating and film" category and has always been classified as a top-level journal by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and it is also a first-tier journal in the JCR. It is a very distinctive journal.

Those who don't value this journal are usually chasing trends and working on new materials, which may not have much significance and are just combinations. Many important articles in the field of engineering materials, surface engineering, and surface science are published in this journal, making it an authoritative publication in the surface field.

Goodwill 2021-12-23

It's not enough to only consider the impact factor. This journal ranks first in the "Coatings and Films" section and is highly recognized in the field of surface engineering and surface science. Support the classification by the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

dawang 2021-12-23

After reading the first floor, I realized that all the articles posted were about the third and fourth districts.

知否 2021-12-22

What the hell are these things, blindly complaining, and shamelessly selecting direct recruitment for those who have already been hired? Trash.

Mr. 周 2021-12-22

I really don't understand. JCR partition has always been in Zone 1, while the Chinese Academy of Sciences used to be in Zone 2. Who are these people? They keep comparing themselves to ACS Omega and asking me to appreciate their masterpiece.