回复审稿人意见

Thank you for your Suggestions. All your Suggestions are very important. They are of great guiding significance to my further thesis writing and scientific research.

结尾

Thanks again for your advice and I hope I can learn more from you.

================================================

Thank you for your patience reading the manuscript and I’m very appreciate with your kind suggestions. Below is my response:

Comment #1: 语言不流畅

回复:We are very sorry for the mistakes in this manuscript and inconvenience they caused in your reading. The manuscript has been thoroughly revised and edited by a native English speaker, so we hope it can meet the journal’s standard. Thanks so much for your useful comments.

 

We regret there were problems with the English. The paper has been carefully revised by a professional language editing service to improve the grammar and readability.

Grammar and word usage were improved throughout the paper. I have used Grammarly plug-in and ask help from colleagues reviewing my manuscript for clarity, and corrected by a colleague whose native language is English.

Thanks for pointing out those issues, we revised the grammar and word usage carefully throughout the manuscript under the help of kind colleagues.

Comment #2: 创新性

Thank you for this valuable feedback. Our research [is the first to show that…]/[confirms the findings of White et al. in a younger age group…]/[improves the yield of…]. We have added a sentence to the Abstract (page 2 line 5, and paragraph to the Discussion section (page 15 starting line 8), to clarify this.
非常感谢您富有建设性的反馈。我们的研究“是第一个表明”、“验证了在更年轻人群中怀特等人的发现…”、”提高了…”。我们已经在摘要部分增加了一句话加以说明“第二页第五行”,并且在讨论部分(第15页第8行)也加以澄清。

Point 7: Regarding the references cited in Section 1, it would be nice to include recent learning-based pose estimation techniques such as PointNet, PointNet++, DeepIM, DenseFusion, etc. Besides that, 3 out of 4 types of objects used for testing in the submitted work can be considered as planar objects. Therefore, it might be worth to include the previous works on random bin-picking for planar objects in the prior art section.

Response 7: We really appreciate your suggestions, related papers are added and those start-of-the-art methods are also useful for me in further research. The added references are [34][35][39][40][41].

 



作者:海宝编辑
链接:https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/38593362
来源:知乎
著作权归作者所有。商业转载请联系作者获得授权,非商业转载请注明出处。

  • 0
    点赞
  • 6
    收藏
    觉得还不错? 一键收藏
  • 打赏
    打赏
  • 0
    评论
IEEE Access是一本领先的学术期刊,致力于在各个领域发表高质量的文章和研究,以促进学术界和工业界之间的交流和合作。在该期刊中发表文章需要经过严格的审稿程序,包括初次审稿和回复审稿人意见。本文将就IEEE Access回复审稿人意见模板进行详细介绍。 在回复审稿人意见时,作者需要认真对待每一条审稿人意见,包括针对文章中可能存在的问题和缺陷提出的评论、建议和修订意见。在回复审稿人意见时,作者需要信中指出自己对于每一条意见的回应,明确表达对于评论的理解、接受和反驳,同时具体说明对于建议和修订意见的操作和改进方法。 根据IEEE Access提供的回复审稿人意见模板,作者的回应应该包括以下内容: 1. 意见编号:回应应包括审稿人提出问题对应的编号,便于读者和编辑能够迅速理解作者的回复。 2. 评论和反馈:作者需要表达对于审稿人提出的问题和建议的理解、接受和反驳,并陈述相关证据。 3. 修订建议:作者需要明确说明对于审稿人提出的文章修订意见的接受度,并提出具体的改进方法。 4. 结论:作者需要在回应信中总结对于审稿人意见的回应和改进方法,同时再次强调文章的贡献和价值。 在具体操作中,作者可以综合运用各类文章修改工具,如跟踪问题和文本比对等编辑工具,以便于能够直观地展示文章的改进和完善。 总之,回复审稿人意见是IEEE Access审稿程序不可或缺的一步,对于保证文章质量和学术成果的发表起到了至关重要的作用。因此,作者需要确保回应信的准确、清晰、详实,并专注于改进和提升文章的质量和价值。

“相关推荐”对你有帮助么?

  • 非常没帮助
  • 没帮助
  • 一般
  • 有帮助
  • 非常有帮助
提交
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包

打赏作者

yaked19

你的鼓励将是我创作的最大动力

¥1 ¥2 ¥4 ¥6 ¥10 ¥20
扫码支付:¥1
获取中
扫码支付

您的余额不足,请更换扫码支付或充值

打赏作者

实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值