2023.6.1 First time submit initial draft
9.18 revise and resubmit
10.11 submit after revision
12.13 Awaiting SE Recommendation
12.16 revise and resubmit
12.19 submit after revision

2024.2.8 Accept Without Changes

(0) 讚！ | MelanchoLee

What field does the OP work in?

(0) 讚！ | MelanchoLee

2023.10.16 Manuscript received by admin
2023.10.19 EIC assign manuscript to SE
out of scope
This journal is really unbelievable, more than a week for this

(0) 讚！ | wizardwangjiang

2023.6.1 Submission of initial draft
2023.6.7 EIC assigns AE
2023.6.12 Awaiting Reviewer Assignment
2023.7.31 Awaiting Reviewer Scores

The direction is relatively niche, and it may be difficult to find reviewers. From 6.12 to 7.31, almost two months were spent on assigning reviewers. Currently, waiting for the first review to come back (edited on 2023.8.31

(1) 讚！ | MelanchoLee

What did the original poster submit after getting rejected?

(0) 讚！ | 陈昱衡

The review speed is very fast, and the first review came back in less than two months. However, luck is not very good.

(0) 讚！ | 陈昱衡

Wave energy harvesting. There were three reviewers, and two of them had generally positive opinions with minor revisions. However, one of them completely dismissed my work, and it got rejected. It was a stroke of bad luck, so I decided to submit it to IEEE Transactions on Energy Conservation instead.

(0) 讚！ | 陈昱衡

2022.10.13 Submit
2022.12.19 First Review: Revise and Resubmit. One reviewer recommended acceptance directly, while the other two reviewers had mostly positive opinions but requested additional experiments.
2023.01.27 Revision
2023.03.06 Second Review: Revise and Resubmit. Two reviewers recommended acceptance, while the other reviewer had a minor issue.
2023.03.08 Revision
2023.04.14 Accept Without Changes
Previously, the paper was rejected once by this journal. Overall, I am satisfied with the reviewers' comments and find their expertise to be high.

(0) 讚！ | birdman

My job is purely simulation, and I have received it.

(0) 讚！ | 科研yy

Excuse me, would pure simulation be considered as insufficient workload and be rejected for publication?

(0) 讚！ | 电气小子

June 10th - Submit
August 13th - Revise and resubmit
September 14th - Revise
October 13th - Accept Without Changes
Overall, the journal review process is relatively fast. There were three reviewers in the first round of review, one suggesting major revisions, one suggesting minor revisions, and the last reviewer directly rejecting the paper due to insufficient innovation. The editor requested major revisions, which took one month to complete, and the revised version was accepted directly.

(17) 讚！ | 科研yy

Does this mean "submitted for review"?

(1) 讚！ | 石岐拉莫斯

Explain that the reason for the slow first submission is because Reviewer 3 always provided more comments each time, with the comments filled with exclamation marks. It took two months to receive their feedback, which was overwhelming. At that time, I even started looking for another journal because of this. That's why it took a long time to submit this time. I have submitted to this journal before and the review process was very fast, with the first review usually returned in less than a month. The Editor-in-Chief of this journal is also really nice, and their reminders are always effective, with a good attitude.

(0) 讚！ | 武器大师成龙

Second submission:
2021-12-13 Submitted
2022-01-26 Rejected, with extensive comments from 6 reviewers. Upon careful examination, it can be seen that all the comments suggest major revisions, as they all mention "should be modified in the next version". The editor considered the abundance of comments and some unresolved issues as reasons for rejection, but also acknowledged the article's innovative aspects and allowed for resubmission. However, due to concerns about not being accepted before graduation, I chose to submit to another journal with a more consistent publication speed. Overall, as long as I don't encounter unreasonable reviewers, this journal has a relatively fast reviewing process, quick rejections, and the reviewers' comments are generally valuable. The overall submission experience is positive.

(0) 讚！ | 武器大师成龙

2021-01-26 Submit
2021-06-13 Revision 1
2021-07-27 Resubmit 1, 3 reviewers, accepted after modifications.
2021-09-30 Revision 2, 2 reviewers have no objections, reviewer 3 mentioned that the response was too detailed, yes, it was indeed too detailed... and came back with even more comments than last time.
2021-10-10 Resubmit 2
2021-12-12 Revision 3
2022-01-26 Resubmit 3
2022-03-31 Accept after changes

(2) 讚！ | 武器大师成龙

SUBMITTED: 13-Apr-2021; 
DECISIONED: 26-Aug-2021; 
RESULT: Reject - Do Not Resubmit (26-Aug-2021)

It's disappointing to wait for four months and receive two unremarkable opinions that hold no valuable references. It's a bit disheartening.

The paper focuses on load frequency control in microgrids, and there is some degree of innovation, although it only includes pure simulation.

By the way, when submitting the PDF manuscript, the editor requested it to be no longer than 10 pages.

This is my first time writing a review, and I hope it can be helpful to everyone!

(20) 讚！ | Marchion

I invested at the end of March, it has been three months already and there are still no results. Stay calm.

(0) 讚！ | xusita1

May I ask what is your manuscript number, I haven't received any notification for over two months.

(0) 讚！ | 肉蛋充饥

2021.05 Submission
2021.07 Rejection, three reviewers, one acceptance, one rejection (1. No innovation. 2. Requires experimental validation, cannot be purely simulated), the third reviewer did not provide any comments.

(0) 讚！ | Dan969

Brother, I have been submitting my work for two months and still haven't received any news. What is your submission number?

(0) 讚！ | 肉蛋充饥

I'm back again, and I chose this journal again because I was satisfied with the speed of the review process and the submission experience before. However, this time it is much slower... I wonder if it's because of the pandemic.

Submitted on 26th January 2021.
Revised on 13th June 2021.

During the process, I contacted the Editorial Office (ADM) three times, respectively at 3 months, 3 and a half months, and 4 months. The first time, ADM replied that the manuscript was still in the review process, but they did not respond to the second and third attempts. In the end, I had no choice but to find the editor's personal email address and sent a reminder. The editor immediately responded, stating that they had found three reviewers and urged the Associate Editor (AE) to expedite the process. The next day, AE provided me with the comments from the three reviewers for revise and resubmit.

Among the three reviewers, one seems to be a junior colleague, and their comments were more challenging. They even referred to our previously published paper and requested a comparison... (Because this paper had been under review for 4 and a half months, and a lot of subsequent work was based on this research, we couldn't wait any longer and decided to submit it elsewhere, but it got accepted before this paper's review process...) The remaining two reviewers provided more moderate comments. All three reviewers were professional and raised valuable questions.

(3) 讚！ | 武器大师成龙

The first trial took one and a half months, and after revisions, the second trial took over a month to reach the final outcome.

(0) 讚！ | 武器大师成龙

Hello, may I ask how long it takes to get the results after making the modifications?

(0) 讚！ | wdf6688

After submitting to this journal, the status will be displayed as "under review" until the review results are available, without providing any further details.

(0) 讚！ | 武器大师成龙

Is it normal for a manuscript to go directly under review after submission? Shouldn't it first be with the editor? Is the process of this journal somewhat different?

(0) 讚！ | 1936352208@qq.com