xhcvvvv 2021-07-07

It has been nine days, and there is still no outcome.

快乐的考拉 2021-07-06

May I ask if the results have been released?

xhcvvvv 2021-06-29

It should not be distributed.

31008110422 2021-06-28

Does the second trial not assign an adm?

xhcvvvv 2021-06-28

The current status of the second review is "under review" and "Evaluating Recommendation".

xhcvvvv 2021-06-28

After the second review, there has been a status of "under review" continuously. Now, there is a new status of "Evaluating Recommendation." Does this mean that the result is about to be released?

31008110422 2021-06-25

Is there any latest news?

xhcvvvv 2021-06-10

In English, the text translates to: "So, does it mean that the status of the second review is that the adm will not allocate it all the time? And then below is 'under review'."

胡萝卜@ 2021-06-10

I am also like this, I have never been assigned as an adm, and the status before acceptance has always been adm unallocated.

xhcvvvv 2021-06-09

I would like to ask if the second review will allocate adm? Why hasn't adm been allocated after 26 days? Please answer my question.

胡萝卜@ 2021-05-21

Keep up the good work.
19-May-2021 Accept
4-Apr-2021 Major repair launched.
12-Jan-2021 Major
02-Oct-2020 Launched

TSERROF 2021-05-17

When I did the 1st review, it was the same. There was a cover at the front and a novelty file at the back. During the 2nd review, the first time we produced a PDF to check, it was also the same. However, the second time, we also attached a response letter. I don't know what happened...

xhcvvvv 2021-05-13

The reply letter has already been uploaded in the first step, right? Is it a separate file? It is not displayed in "view proof", right?

xhcvvvv 2021-05-13

Hello, I would like to ask if the reply letter after the first trial cannot be seen in "view proof"? Has the reply letter been uploaded in the first step as a separate file?

TSERROF 2021-04-25

Major Revision (03-Feb-2020)
Major Revision (03-Nov-2020)
Accept (22-Apr-2021)

I don't know if it's because of the browser or what, but the response letter for the first revision wasn't submitted and attached to the article. Before submitting the second revision, I clicked generate PDF twice and it was okay. The response letter for the second revision was also attached to the first one. I guess the reviewers were confused too.

P.S. Based on the reviewers' comments: some really understood, some really didn't understand, some were lazy to provide suggestions, and some had a lot of suggestions... revising is a process of balancing reviewer opinions and sticking to one's own beliefs.

Onward and upward!

lililisa 2021-04-22

Amazing, come and share some good luck.

aa orange 2021-04-14

Received unanimous affirmation from two reviewers after three months. The first reviewer even praised it as highly innovative and interesting. After addressing some minor issues raised, it was accepted for publication without further revisions.

夹住尾巴 2021-04-14

First trial lasted 8 months, and the final result took one year and three months.
Submitted in January 2020.
Major revision for the first trial in September 2020: Two reviewers, Reviewer 1 provided positive feedback, while Reviewer 2 asked irrelevant questions.
Revised in December 2020.
Major revision for the second trial in February 2021: Reviewer 1 agreed to accept the paper, and it seems that the editor changed Reviewer 2. Reviewer 2's comments appeared to be more neutral.
Revised in March 2021.
Rejected in April 2021: Reviewer 2, who seemed to be neutral, believed that the paper lacked an engineering background and suggested submitting it to a mathematics journal.
Submitting a paper is really a matter of luck, it's all about making a living, and is it necessary to waste one or two years of time only to have it rejected in the end?

HCLu 2021-03-30

2020.12.21 submitted under review
2021.01.05 assigned to editor under review
2021.02.10 evaluating recommendation
2021.02.11 under review
2021.03.29 rejected
There were two reviewers for my article. The first reviewer did not approve of my work and believed that what I was working on was outdated. They recommended a few articles, one of which was from this month's IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL. It seems that the article they recommended was either their own or one they had reviewed before. I feel like the first reviewer is a prominent figure in the field. The second reviewer had a more positive opinion and found a point I raised interesting and theoretically sound. Overall, the review comments were quite fair. Perhaps the journal's standards are very high and my article needs significant improvement.

weily 2021-03-16

May I ask if submitting to this journal means it is currently under review? It seems like there are no other statuses. Mine has already gone through three rounds of review.

winnerche 2021-03-10

It's been almost five months, still no news. Graduation is just around the corner.

winnerche 2021-02-03

It has been over three months, and there is still no news.

31008110422 2021-01-20

Can we get to know each other? My QQ is 1053445812.

空空道人 2021-01-20

It has been nearly five months since submission, and there is still no news. How should I respond to this journal?

winnerche 2021-01-10

Yes, I almost update my status every day, so I know the dates of status changes.

【HCLu】2021-01-10 18:11:12
May I ask where to find the start date of these processes? After submitting my contribution, I can only see the "created" and "submitted" dates. Under "adm: edit name," there is an "under review" status, but there is no date.

HCLu 2021-01-10

May I ask where to find the start dates for these processes? After submitting my contribution, I can only see the "created" and "submitted" dates. Under "ADM: Editor's Name," there is an "under review" status but no date provided.

winnerche 2021-01-09

The condition hasn't changed, still the same as before.

31008110422 2021-01-08

@winnerche Any latest updates?