has always been under review, should I take the initiative to contact?

(1) 讚！ | Anonymous

has been away from school for more than two months. This is the work done during the master's degree. I mainly do research on the interaction between laser and materials.From the time of submission in July to the present, it only takes two months, and I feel that both the reviewer and the editor are responsible.After revising the comments of Xiao Xiu yesterday, I opened the mail this morning and found that the article has been received. I feel very happy.The following is the first review and second opinion of the editor. 1. Your paper has now been refereed. A copy of the referee's report is enclosed with this message. Although your paper is i

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

first submitted the journal,I feel very good in a journal, which is very fast. From submission to acceptance for a total of one and a half months, the editors and reviewers are very responsible. The reviewers’ comments are very pertinent and help the article. The following is the contribution record.:Received at Editorial Office: 24 May 2013 Article revised: 1 Jul 2013 Article accepted for publication: 15 Jul 2013

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

The review of this journal is very fast. The following is the process of submission to acceptance: 2012-12-28 submitted to journal2013-01-04 under review2013-02-07 major revise2013-02-21 revised submittted 2013-02-28 accepted reviewer, the editor is very responsible, giving a big help to the language improvement

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

really understand what is the level of professional journals although the impactJust after the factor is 1, the level of the reviewer is like submiting in APL.The problem is very professional and you must also satisfy him.Other journals below 3 are basically answered to the seventy-eighth edition.This journal has changed one of the four problems for me. This is a minor repair 4 times.The most handsome thing is that every time the reviewer will write you a full overthrow of evidence and related references, it is not easy to get away with it. Unfortunately, the good article has been intercepted by JAP, APL, PRB, otherwise the journal should be able to pass 2

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

I submitted my paper and after four days it was submitted for review. After 20 days, the review comments came back. Since the reviewers were recommended, and there are only a few people in the world in this field, according to the style of writing, it can be inferred who reviewed the manuscript. The reviewer must have read it very carefully. The questions raised were very detailed. Overall the entire submission process took about 6 months.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

Journal Homepage URL: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find ... ription#description

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

This journal is a professional journal of nuclear technology and physics.In the past, a little data can be poured, but since 2009, individuals feel that the submission is more and more difficult, and may even catch up with journals such as Appl sur sci.Personally, the reviewer does not ask you how much data you have, but you must use a page of about 4 pages to explain a very small problem in the field. Do not use eight shares. Otherwise, even if you do a lot of experiments, you may beRefused.In short, submiting in this journal is a bit of a struggle.When I selectd for the second time, I was rejected and selectd for another small journal of 2.6.But I can't deny that I always think that this is a good journal. Everyone remembers to choose the editor of the United States.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

is a good journal in the field of radiation effect research, but the impact factor has not been high, and it has been squatting up and down.In 2009, it was hard to get on 1.The comments will be revised within two months after submission, and will be accepted one month after the revision is uploaded.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名