感悟投稿

感悟投稿篇一：生活感悟投稿邮箱

一些地址:

《大众日报》：

“大众周末”郭爱凤：dzgaf@sina.com

“丰收”副刊，刘君：jk3407@163.com

《齐鲁晚报》：

“青未了”副刊，张成东：qlqwl@163169.net

“人间”、“生活广记”曲鹏：www3163@163169.net

《生活日报》：

“大家专栏”、“大家小品”宜冰：ybyb9@163.com

“情感·倾诉”鹿玲：ll@mail.dzdaily.com.cn

《都市信报》：

“心情笔记”李毅：liy@mail.dzdaily.com.cn

“男左女右”、“非常故事”李毅：liy@mail.dzdaily.com.cn

《济南时报》：

“海右”副刊聂双：sbfkb@163.com

“国风”（杂文）束学山：shuxs28@hotmail.com

“市井”（千字内的小故事）窦小娟：douzi71@hotmail.com

《青岛日报》编辑部

工交部 投稿E-mail：rbgjb@qingdaonews.com 财贸部 投稿E-mail：rbcmb@qingdaonews.com

农村部 投稿E-mail：rbncb@qingdaonews.com 政法部 投稿E-mail：rbzfb@qingdaonews.com

科教部 投稿E-mail：rbkjb@qingdaonews.com 文艺部 投稿E-mail：rbwyb@qingdaonews.com

理论部 投稿E-mail：rbllb@qingdaonews.com 群工部 投稿E-mail：rbqgb@qingdaonews.com

摄影部 投稿E-mail：rbsyb@qingdaonews.com 总编室 投稿E-mail：rbzbs@qingdaonews.com

特刊部 投稿E-mail：rbtkb@qingdaonews.com 新闻研究室 投稿E-mail：rbxwyjs@qingdaonews.com

外宣部 投稿E-mail：rbwxb@qingdaonews.com 时事部 投稿E-mail：rbssb@qingdaonews.com

感悟投稿篇二：详细投稿历程及感悟

详细投稿历程及感悟（转）

管理提醒: 本帖被 何会文 从 论文资源 移动到本区(2009-12-15)

前天收到编辑来信,一篇文章被接受了,影响因子刚过2,虽然不是很高,还是让人高兴.主要是这个领域不是博士期间工作的继续,做起来总有种摸着石头过河的感觉.回顾这篇文章的投稿历程,有些感悟,写出来与各位交流:

大体的投稿历程:

3.18初投 过了几天助理编辑回信说格式要改,这个比较意外,因为以前有篇文章在该期刊上发过,格式是一样的,看来期刊的投稿要求也会变,没办法,改.

3.23投出,3.25编辑处理

4.10收到审稿意见 (有些内容用符号代替):

Dear Dr LLLL

Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will see that they are advising that you revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision.

……

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1: The paper is acceptable with major technical revision.

The authors report the first theoretical calculations of AB, revealing three equilibrium structures, the most stable structure of which has an interaction between the hydrogen atom with a hydride character and the aluminum atom.The transiti

on states of the isomerization between the three structures are also calculated.Solvent effects on the structures of the three iso(来自:WWw.zHaoqT.net 蒲公 英文 摘:感悟投稿)mers are also predicted, even though the effects are concluded to be small.These findings are of importance as basic knowledge about XXX of group 13 elements, which were not investigated.Therefore, the reviewer thinks that the manuscript is worth publishing in the Journal of ...Before publication, the following remarks should be addressed:

1)The last sentence in the introduction is not suitable for an introduction and should be moved to the conclusion.

2)p2, line 5 from the bottom: The ground states of CC are usually triplet, while those of GG are usually singlet. Therefore, the term "Similar" here is not appropriate.Perhaps they should use the term "Unlike", instead of "Similar to".References concerning each of the ground states should be cited.

3) p3, line 9: The reviewer thinks that 0.006 ? is within an acceptable margin of error and is not worth discussing.Therefore, the phrase starting from "indicating" should be revised.

4) p3, line 5 from the bottom: The reviewer cannot understand that complex 2, having a very weak interaction between the Ge and Al atoms, has the obvious character of a GG.In contrast, he can understand that complex 1 has the obvious character of a GG.Therefore, additional explanations about the structure of complex 2 should be demonstrated.

5) Before consideration of the structures of the present complex, the reviewer thinks that the transition states for the formation of the complex from A and B should be discussed,

because the complex is generated from A and B.

Reviewer #2: Routine calculations are performed for the three isomers of AB and isomerization of these isomers. However, this may be publishable, after the following points are made clearer.

(1) Only three isomers are located for AB. It seems that there is one more isomer that originates from the exchange of one hydrogen and the Cl1 atom in complex 1. Did the authors perform the full search?

(2) Do the authors assume that complexes 1-3 are formed by the reaction of A and B? If so, the reaction path should be presented.

(3) It is suggested that complex 2 is the predominant form of AB. The authors should mention how complex 2 is efficient as a cyclopropanating reagent, since this is an important goal of this manuscript.

(4) P. 2, Line 5 from the bottom. Obviously, the ground state of CC is not singlet but triplet.

(5) For binding energies, could the authors present also the BSSE (basis-set-superposition-error) corrected values.

下面是4.13修改回信:

Dear Professor TTT:

Thank you very much for giving us a chance to respond to the Referees’ reviews and we would like to thank the referees for their nice comments on our manuscript. We have considered the comments of Referees’ and made some changes

in the manuscript. Our changes and response are presented in the following. Thank you for your time and your consideration of this paper. Should there be any questions or suggestions, please feel free to contact me by e-mail at …

1. Response to comment (1) of Reviewer #1

Considering the Reviewer’s suggestion, the last sentence in the introduction has been moved to the conclusion.

2. Response to comment (2) of Reviewer #1 and comment

(4) of Reviewer #2:

Considering the suggestions of Reviewers’, the term "Similar to " has been changed to be the term "Unlike" and two References [49] and [50] have been added.

3. Response to comment (3) of Reviewer #1:

Considering the Reviewer’s suggestion, the sentence “The G-A bond length of complex 1 is 0.006A shorter than that of Y, indicating that the interaction between G and A in complex 1 is a bit stronger than in Y.” has been changed to be “The G-A bond length of complex 1 is only 0.006A shorter than that of Y, indicating that the interaction between G and

A in complex 1 is similar to that in Y.”

4. Response to comment (4) of Reviewer #1

We thank the reviewer’s criticism and indeed the previous depiction was not appropriate. Therefore we deleted the sentence “indicating that complex 2 has obvious character of g...”. We do not think that the deletion affect the description for complex 2 and influence the conclusion of the manuscript.

5. Response to comment (5) of Reviewer #1 and comment

(2) of Reviewer #2:

We understand the Reviewers’ suggestions. However, we did not add any content about the raction of A and B. The reasons are following:

a) Though the germylenoid AB could be considered as the complex of A with B, the reaction of A and B are not easy and in fact it is not a feasible way to generating germylenoid AB by using the reaction of A and B. (until now there are not any stable gg being prepared by experiments) So we do not think it is necessary to study the reaction path of A and B.

b) In previous similar studies on cc, ss, and gg, the reactions of A and B had been not studied. We do not think it would influence the conclusions of the present manuscripte without the study on the reaction of A and B.

6. Response to comment (1) of Reviewer #2

We performed the full search. The calculations indicated that the possible “isomer” which the Reviewer #2 suggested has two imaginary frequencies and we conclude that it is not a isomer of AB.

7. Response to comment (3) of Reviewer #2

The main goal of the manuscript is the exploring on the possible structure of the germylenoid AB in gas phase and some solvents. Of course, “which structure is an efficient cyclopropanating reagent and how the cyclopropanation reactions occur” are interesting topics. However, we consider these interesting topics are outside of the scale of the present manuscript. So we did not add any interrelated content.

8. Response to comment (5) of Reviewer #2

The binding energies did not include the BSSE corrected en

感悟投稿篇三：APL投稿感悟

APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS APL作为应用物理最高期刊 出版周期 Weekly

期刊主页网址: http://apl.aip.org/

在线投稿网址:

投过一篇，发现被直接拒稿。后来才想明白，原来投稿系统中可能有个功能，看看有没有引用APL的文献，如果没有，那就直接被拒了。编辑发给我的信中，也直接这样写了，说还是投到你引用的期刊上发表吧。

科研不知APL，投遍论文也枉然！实验室的老师和师兄师姐们论文投稿的第一选择都是ＡＰＬ，录了很多篇了，自己做了一个小东西，有点创意，但和拼指标的论文相比，相距甚远！在老师的鼓励下，写了份详细的稿件，老师看后，提出三点，也就是ＡＰＬ的精髓：Ａ代表应用背景扩展，Ｐ代表物理模型解析，Ｌ代表新颖性和创新性。论文的重中之重要先Ｌ，再Ｐ，最后Ａ！自己在这样的思路指导下，坚决执行Ｌ-Ｐ-Ａ顺序对论文开始重新组织：Ｌ是老师给指出来；Ｐ的话，花了很长时间，大概一个多月，读了３０多篇相关文章，模型根基才算打牢；和老师商量了Ａ，再把图片一个个的清晰化（很关键），前后２个月，完成文章！投出去后，赶上圣诞节，到大年初二，意见回来：

Reviewer #1 (Comments to the Author):

This is a useful contribution to the field. It should be published "as is".

这是个比较快的杂志，收和拒都很快的，如果你做的比较有新意，可以选择投稿，去年投了一篇，修了两次接受大概用了3各月，今年投了两篇，一篇投稿四天后直接接受（这个有一定运气成分，但这篇文章准备了一年半，之前修改的比较多了）

一共投稿五次，中了两篇，一篇送审。文章要有很新的物理思想，倘若结果不好，就要看论文通篇的写法。最近几年，稿件的标准有所提高，最通常的原因往往是因为稿件缺乏深刻的物理内涵。所以最适合投稿APL的工作是，有足够的创新性，并且通过深入谈论，得出非常明了、直接的结论。

APL老牌杂志，影响广泛。 因为存在pre-screening，编辑直接拒稿率较高。一个审稿人，存在较大随机性，不过一般审的都不错（毕竟是老牌杂志，审稿人数据库比较完善）。个人认为要比nano letters等“家族”式期刊更具参考价值。其论文被引用总量在SCI期刊也是佼佼者。值得投稿！

材料类全球权威期刊，去年中了一篇，前后大修2次，小修1次，APL审稿速度很快，从投递初稿，到修改，接收，整个来回将近20天。最大的感触就是APL的摘要需要限制在100个单词之内

APL上面的文章，比较强调时效性、与应用和实验研究挂钩。好处是刚出来时候看的人多，缺点是读者兴趣随时间快速衰减。与它互补的有发表长篇的J. Appl.

Phys. (JAP)。

APL是二类杂志中比较好的。特点是研究内容容新，具有应用背景。现在是一个人审稿，审稿速度超快。文章的观点明确，内容较短。内容新颖，具有物理思想的文章中APL比较容易。

应用物理类的最好期刊，要求的东西比较新，而且有一点的物理思想。1要足够Applied，没有应用背景的文章比较难中， 2要有Physics，没有物理思想，或者物理思想不清晰的文章会比较困难，3是Lett，就是要新，别人没做过的。

相关热词搜索：感悟 投稿 人生感悟投稿 业务员感悟投稿