看看你属于哪类？期刊编辑回复的合集
一. 系统状态
1. Manuscript Submitted:
论文已经顺利上传到投稿系统中，等待编辑部的进一步处理。
2. Editor Invited
论文提交后，期刊编辑部会进行初步的审查（论文格式、查重等等），之后会交给编辑。
3. With Editor
编辑已经开始审稿，如果论文与期刊主题不符或者没有达到期刊标准，可能会被拒稿。
4. Reviewer Invited
编辑向审稿人发出邀请，等待审稿人回复。如果审稿人拒绝审稿，系统会显示“with Editor”
5. Under Review
审稿人已经开始审理稿件，大部分期刊审稿时间约1-4个月，具体情况看期刊和审稿人而定。
6. Required Reviews Completed
所有审稿人已经完成审稿，并且将审稿意见反馈到编辑部。
7. Decision in Process
编辑部会根据审稿人的意见，综合评估论文，并给出结果。
8. Revise
根据审稿意见，作者需要在1-3个月内完成论文的修改工作，并根据审稿意见将修改好的论文手稿上传至系统。
9. Revised Manuscript Submitted
修改好的稿件已经成功提交。
10. Reject/Accept
拒绝或者接收。大部分期刊会给1-2次审稿意见，如果达到了期刊的标准，审稿人也满意，就可以被接收，否则就是拒稿。当然，如果觉得编辑和审稿人说的不在理，太离谱，可以选择拒绝修改 Author Declines to Revise
二. 编辑和审稿人意见
1. 给的评价都是负面的
The comments of the reviewers, certainly short, are clearly negative. The authors have proposed a XXXX model without any clear XXXX. The novelty is poor. The quality of prediction is not very good. I suggest to reject this submission.
Although your manuscript falls within the aim and scope of this journal, it is being declined due to lack of sufficient novelty. We receive a much larger number of papers than we are able to accept.
2. 意见很不一致——有的拒绝和有的同意
The two reviewers were split on their opinions of the manuscript, with one calling for it to be rejected due to scientific quality and the other feeling it could be published after being revised. In my own reading, I tend to agree with the comments that the authors do not properly communicate what is novel in their results.
Two reviewers have provided critical feedback on this paper, but opposite recommendations. Due to the major concerns raised by the two reviewers, I am recommending that the paper be declined.
3. 一致同意接收
Both reviewers recommended acceptance and I concur.
