归零，开始 2021-07-19

It has been two months since I submitted it, but there is still no result. I am a bit anxious. Wasn't it supposed to be fast?

归零，开始 2021-07-19

Brother, haven't you gotten any results yet? I have been waiting for almost two months for mine.

xixi123456 2021-07-19

Although the internet has no memory, it can find IP addresses and even take screenshots as evidence. Are you willing to take legal responsibility for these words? Most articles published in this journal should not be edited or plagiarized. If the article is printed out and does not match the situation you mentioned, and it is written sincerely, are you willing to take criminal responsibility for defamation? Speaking with such vulgarity truly pollutes the online environment! Have you considered the consequences of speaking so recklessly?

学术小混混 2021-07-18

I have also served as a reviewer for this trash journal once. Damn it, a 14-day deadline, just like the top journals Applied Science, Sensors, and PLOS One. The article quality is extremely poor, it's like eating shit. They are all photoshopped images (flipping others' images and using them as their own), overlapping and flipping the same set of 10 lines. It's a garbage journal. Do those who submit to this journal have no sense at all? With 30,000 submissions, a 47% acceptance rate, 7 days for review, and a $1600 publication fee... I advise those who still plan to continue doing research to focus on submitting to reputable journals. Who will recognize the quantity achieved through this shitty journal in good universities?

费米 2021-07-17

Support the original poster, should we not reject these extreme anti-China Western fascists who politicize the COVID-19 pandemic?

lcw 2021-07-16

I have completed the experimental part and have uploaded the code to my own git and shared the link with the reviewer. I didn't directly send it to the reviewer privately. I felt uncomfortable when the reviewer asked for references to two unrelated papers. I have already resubmitted the revised version and am still awaiting the results.

小鱼儿 2021-07-16

As long as the referenced paper has nothing to do with your research, especially if it is outrageous, you can directly criticize it and apply for a change of reviewer. Why bother dealing with such a reviewer? Editors do read cover letters, and if the reasons are valid and sufficient, they will change the reviewer.

提醒我搞科研 2021-07-14

Brother, it's excessive to say that the novel coronavirus originated from Wuhan!

nimingren 2021-07-14

The speed of the review is impressive, really fast. The first time took about a month, and the second time around half a month.
However, I feel that the reviewers are somewhat biased...
The first time, they recommended making the review process public for academic development. In the response, they also mentioned that it would be made public before publication. However, it was rejected, stating that it cannot be made public immediately. What kind of operation is this????
In general, it may be because I didn't cite a few articles that the reviewer wanted, so they might be upset. But I think there are reasons for not citing them, and I have explained them. From this perspective, it is still advisable to follow the reviewer's suggestions and include those citations. If it doesn't pass, we can remove them later.
Furthermore, the articles they wanted me to cite all claim that COVID-19 originated from Wuhan, China. I'm sorry, but I cannot cite articles containing such statements.

脸皮不是很厚 2021-07-14

It has been a month since I submitted, but still no news. Just saw a warning, thinking of changing. It's not because I saw the September awards announcement. Sigh, hurry up.

行走 2021-07-14

When the reviewer requests to have the program source code sent to them for verification, it is a blatant act of plagiarizing information resources. The author has the right to refuse this absurd request. The program source code is developed by the author's hard work and can be chosen not to be made public.

linmd1989 2021-07-13

As a reviewer for IEEE Access, the reputation of IEEE Access has been tarnished in the past two years, leading to a flood of low-quality papers being submitted. I have already rejected five papers (all of them being garbage papers on Pakistan's China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and hardness). Now, it is necessary to be more stringent.

无敌 2021-07-10

Rejected after modification, there are still quality requirements.

Yingjie Zhou 2021-07-09

Has the speed of reviewing slowed down now? It has been over a month and it is still under review.

手游吃鸡大师 2021-07-08

Correcting a bit, it is PPNA. The review speed is extremely slow, and the journal is also of low quality.

手游吃鸡大师 2021-07-08

I didn't apply, but another friend in my laboratory did. I personally got accepted for two papers in the first section of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), and I have also helped my advisor review funding proposals. If a proposal has access, I am 100% sure it will be graded lower.

I am not just blindly criticizing. The CAS sectioning and warning list are like guiding principles. If you have the courage, you can apply without worrying about losing face.

Graduation is not relevant to our discussion.

Based on my own experience in reviewing with access, the reviewing process has become stricter, and it is not as easy to get accepted as before. It is estimated that in a few years, some journals may be removed from the warning list. After all, there are some CCF-C journals that are even worse than access, like PNAA.

华电科研小白鼠 2021-07-08

How are you, bro? Have you been hired?

小鱼儿 2021-07-06

Please stop cross-dressing... Can you at least put some effort into changing your disguise? Look at your previous disguises, you only changed a word or two... You can't even come up with a good name, what else can you do? And your content is always the same few sentences... Even your comments are just spam, can you do something productive?

求早日毕业 2021-07-05

The journal has been blacklisted by the school. This is the premise.
2021-6-20 Submit
2021-7-4 Reject
14 days, quite fast. Two reviewers, one minor revision, one rejection. The editor suggested resubmitting after minor revisions. But the journal has been put on the school's blacklist...
After much hesitation, let's switch to another journal. In the 2020 JCR, this journal is still Q1 with an impact factor of over 3. If it weren't for being blacklisted by the school, I would have resubmitted. The opening sentences of the Chinese Academy of Sciences warning list state: "Journal warning is not a paper evaluation, let alone denying the achievements published in warned journals." This sentence is highlighted in red and bold, it's a joke, who would take it seriously? Hehe, graduation is difficult, I hope to graduate soon.

mma 2021-07-03

I strongly agree with your opinion. The list in the warning journal has not had its impact factor revoked by JCR. On the contrary, the impact factor has increased and the self-citation rate has decreased. The journals that have had their impact factors revoked by JCR are basically not mentioned by a certain institution. I really don't know what the significance of this warning journal is, apart from increasing the difficulty for assessment of young teachers and students in non-double first-class universities. I don't know where the significance lies.

小鱼儿 2021-07-01

After updating the JCR, I took a look and there are still a few pseudonyms persistently criticizing. I have to admire them a little, it's been several years and they still refuse to let go... How idle and bitter must they be? Additionally, one book that was warned by a certain institution has not been kicked out, while another book in the field of computer and engineering technology that was not warned has been kicked out twice. It seems that the assessment criteria of that institution are higher than JCR. Is it JCR that is not qualified to engage in academia?

学术新手_＆ 2021-07-01

Three categories fell out of the Q1 zone completely... It's better to be cautious when investing.

求快毕业 2021-06-30

The journal has been blacklisted by the school, so it will not be reimbursed, cannot be awarded, and will not be considered as a supervisor's achievement. As for whether it can be used for graduation, there is no notification yet. I just submitted it and it is under review. Now I am hesitating whether to withdraw it or not.

中二也要做科研 2021-06-30

I think the biggest problem with this journal is that the editors don't look like editors (they review all kinds of manuscripts), the reviewers don't look like reviewers (they make some strange requests), and the authors... as long as they keep submitting, they will definitely be accepted.

renwu2 2021-06-29

Haha, this is the biggest joke I've seen this year.

lcw 2021-06-28

The reviewer is reading it very carefully and even asked me to send the code to execute and verify the experimental data for the paper. It doesn't feel as easy as everyone said. I'm still waiting for the reviewer's reply, but I have a feeling it's not going well.

pikachu619 2021-06-28

3.25 Submitted
5.26 Reject (two reviewers, one accepted, one requested revisions and resubmission, editor gave the option to revise and resubmit)
6.15 Submitted
6.27 Accept

KeYanMinGong1 2021-06-24

IEEE Access directly turned the two major works of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, partitioning and early warning, into a joke.

Zynamn 2021-06-23

The articles in open-access journals are also written by us painstakingly, word by word, consuming a lot of time and effort. We don't have a good platform, nor do we have leading experts guiding us, but these articles are the results of our own hard work day and night, and there is nothing to be ashamed of. Just as top researchers have their own bright path, we, as ordinary researchers, also need our own narrow bridge. There are only a few good journals, and the space is limited. These so-called warning journals also provide us, ordinary researchers, a platform to showcase our achievements. Moreover, the internationally recognized Science Citation Index (SCI) has not excluded these journals. If the impact factor and even the ranking of these warning journals increase in July, will it not be a slap in the face for the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS)? If CAS has the ability, they should come up with their own set of standards to compete with SCI, or even replace it.

xiaobai 2021-06-23

There is really no need to care about the warning list. To put it simply, this warning list is just a case of "the thief cries thief." Do whatever you want, anyway, it's just a matter of influence and high impact in District 2.