搜索
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板修改稿回答审稿人的意见（最重要的部分）ListofResponsesDearEditorsandReviewers:Thankyouforyourletterandforthereviewers’commentsconcerningourmanuscriptentitled“PaperTitle”(ID:文章稿号).Thosecommentsareallvaluableandveryhelpfulforrevisingandimprovingourpaper,aswellastheimportantguidingsignificancetoourresearches.Wehavestudiedcommentscarefullyandhavemadecorrectionwhichwehopemeetwithapproval.Revisedportionaremarkedinredinthepaper.Themaincorrectionsinthepaperandtherespondstothereviewer’scommentsareasflowing:Respondstothereviewer’scomments:Reviewer#1:1.Responsetocomment:(……简要列出意见……)Response:××××××2.Responsetocomment:(……简要列出意见……)Response:××××××。。。。。。逐条意见回答，切忌一定不能有遗漏针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用：Weareverysorryforournegligenceof……...Weareverysorryforourincorrectwriting……...ItisreallytrueasReviewersuggestedthat……WehavemadecorrectionaccordingtotheReviewer’scomments.Wehavere-writtenthispartaccordingtotheReviewer’ssuggestionAsReviewersuggestedthat……ConsideringtheReviewer’ssuggestion,wehave……最后特意感谢一下这个审稿人的意见：Specialthankstoyouforyourgoodcomments.Reviewer#2:同上述Reviewer#3:××××××Otherchanges:1.Line60-61,thestatementsof“……”werecorrectedas“…………”2.Line107,“……”wasadded3.Line129,“……”wasdeleted××××××Wetriedourbesttoimprovethemanuscriptandmadesomechangesinthemanuscript.Thesechangeswillnotinfluencethecontentandframeworkofthepaper.Andherewedidnotlistthechangesbutmarkedinredinrevisedpaper.WeappreciateforEditors/Reviewers’warmworkearnestly,andhopethatthecorrectionwillmeetwithapproval.Onceagain,thankyouverymuchforyourcommentsandsuggestions以下是审稿人意见和本人的回复。与大家分享。从中可以看出，这位审稿人认真读了文章，提出很多宝贵的意见。这些意见分布在文章的各个地方。我很诧异有人真正读了我的文章。看到这些意见，我觉得很感激，不是因为接收文章的原因，而是这些意见能真正有助于提高文章的质量。从中还看出，回答审稿人问题的“技巧”。对于回答问题，有的人就是一味反驳，却不加改进。记得ACSStyleGuide里面说，当审稿人问到问题的，哪怕是他理解错误，这也说明作者这么写，其他读者也会理解错误，引起歧义。因此，作者就是要修改句子，使表达不引起歧义。因此：有时间一味反驳，还不如指出具体改进在第几页、第几段。============================================Reviewers'comments:Reviewer#3:Whilerevisingthescript,itistobesuggestedthatauthorshouldclearlyindicatetheaim&scopeofthestudyandwhilemakingconclusion,itistobementionedhowthestudyisusefulforthepracticalpurposes.Inadditionthefollowingarethefewsuggestions/comments,whichmaybeincludedwhilerevision.1.Introductionpartfirstparalastline,authormustavoidtowriteambiguousstatementi.e.,muchworkisstillahead,mayindicateproperly.2.Authorcouldnotdemonstratethereasonwhy,toselecttheorganiccompoundsuchasethylpyruvateforthisstudy?3.Experimentalpart:Itisdifficulttounderstandthein-situRAIRSexperimentswithhomemadeliquid-solidRAIRScell.Moredetailedinformationmaybeusefulfortheothersthosewhoareworkinginthearea.Photographoftheassembledcellmaybeincluded.4.Thedescriptiongivenfortheexperimentalsetup(page4)canbepresentedbyflowdiagraminstead,asaneasetounderstandthesetup.5.ReslutsPart(Page6):COadlayerswithidenticalmonolayercoverages,themonolayercoverage,isitbeenperformedwithsomeadsorptionmodel?Further,itwassuggestedthatCO-saturatedPtsurface,butnotmentionedaboutthesaturationexperiments.Isitobtainedafter60minofCObubbling?6.Page12,2ndpara:ThedisplacementofEtPybyCCl4flushing,isitconfirmedbytheEtPypeaks?Ifso,ithastobementionedclearlyinthepara.Alsointhesamepara,authorreferredforFig.7aand7bbutinthefigures,itdidn'tappear,onlyfigure7appeared.Ifeelitrefersforfigure7,portionAandB,tobecorrected.Similarly,inthetextreferredthefig2a,2b.etcbutonthefiguresheetitismentionedas2A,2B.etc.tobecorrected.7.Page14,1stpara:'contaminationofthePtsurfacebycorrosionofo-ringsinhighconcentrationEtPy',butthestatementhasnotbeensupportedbyotherevidence/literature.8.Pages14through17:theobservedreactivityofvarioussolventsforadsorbedCOonthePtsurface(figs3&4)hastobediscussedmoreprecisely.Thisreviewerisunabletofollowthereasonwhytheyshoweddifferentreactivity,isitprincipallyduetotheorganicmoieties,orduetotheimpuritiesofcommerciallyavailablechemicalsoramixedeffect.Ithastobeclearlydemonstrated,however,theonlyexperimentperformedwithCO/water?CCl4woulddifficulttodescribeitindetail.9.Theauthortrytorestrainwithrepeatedargumentsinthetexte.g.,page3para1:Itwasgeneralizedthat.........,alsoappearedonpage21firstpara.10.Captionsofthefiguresaretoolong,thedetaileddescriptionalreadygiveninthetext,hencewouldnotbeincludedhere.Captionsshouldbeshortandcrispy.===============================================DearEditor,Iquiteappreciateyourfavoriteconsiderationandthereviewer’sinsightfulcomments.NowIhaverevisedtheJCIS-06-247exactlyaccordingtothereviewer’scomments,andfoundthesecommentsareveryhelpful.Ihopethisrevisioncanmakemypapermoreacceptable.Therevisionswereaddressedpointbypointbelow.[general]TheobjectiveofthisresearchwasaddedatthebeginningofthethirdparagraphofIntroduction.HowthestudyisusefulforpracticalpurposeswasaddedattheendofConclusionasoneparagraph.[1]Ambiguousstatementi.e.,“muchworkisstillahead”wasdeleted.[2]Ethylpyruvatewasusedhereasatypicalcompound(containingtwocarbonylgroups)todemonstratethefeasibilityofusingourdiagnosingtooltodetectlow-coverageCO(comingfromdecarbonylationofEtPy)attheliquid-solidinterface.EtPyisareactantusedinliquid-phasechiralcatalysis,andslightdecompositionofEtPytoadsorb