发布时间:2017-01-18 来源: 人生感悟 点击：
工交部 投稿E-mail：firstname.lastname@example.org 财贸部 投稿E-mail：email@example.com
农村部 投稿E-mail：firstname.lastname@example.org 政法部 投稿E-mail：email@example.com
科教部 投稿E-mail：firstname.lastname@example.org 文艺部 投稿E-mail：email@example.com
理论部 投稿E-mail：firstname.lastname@example.org 群工部 投稿E-mail：email@example.com
摄影部 投稿E-mail：firstname.lastname@example.org 总编室 投稿E-mail：email@example.com
特刊部 投稿E-mail：firstname.lastname@example.org 新闻研究室 投稿E-mail：email@example.com
外宣部 投稿E-mail：firstname.lastname@example.org 时事部 投稿E-mail：email@example.com
管理提醒: 本帖被 何会文 从 论文资源 移动到本区(2009-12-15)
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.
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.
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  and  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
APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS APL作为应用物理最高期刊 出版周期 Weekly
Reviewer #1 (Comments to the Author):
This is a useful contribution to the field. It should be published "as is".
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！