I was a reviewer in the third review. This journal required the reviewers to decide whether to accept and submit the review report within 3 months. If it was minor revision, 45 will be given to the reviewers to check the revisions and submit further comments. This journal will reject the manuscript if any reviewer gives negative evaluation.

(3) 讚！ | 叶秋

It is a very rigorous top international journal. It was submitted online. The editor sent it to a reviewer, and privately it also sends it to others for review. More than 4 months later, it showed in the system that the review had been finished and the comments had been raised. However, the final review comments were delayed, and not returned. I directly sent the email the editor-in-chief in charge and asked why. “Isn’t the system already showing that the reviewer has finished reviewing comments?” The editor-in-chief said that there were still one reviewer's comments that had not come back. At that time, I waited with a sense of anxiety, and felt that it was hopeless, otherwise it would not be the case. Later, the results came out in nearly 6 months. Very high evaluation was given in both two review comments, one of which pointed out a few spelling errors. Finally, it was submitted after revision, and the editor-in-chief replied that it was accepted. The final decision was made based on multiple review comments. Even if the first evaluation was high, it would not be accepted in advance. It was very rigorous.

(2) 讚！ | Edward1989

This is a very serious and prestigious journal. The manuscript underwent two rounds of review and I revised it twice. During the second review, the reviewer said that one of his comments in the first review report was wrong, but the author revised it correctly. This showed that the journal had a good reputation for a reason. The second revision was accepted one day after submission.

(5) 讚！ | SR

Well-good journal, German mathematics annual.

(3) 讚！ | Anonymous