遇到这样的审稿意见，简直无语。编辑直接给据了。哎，感觉rebutal的机会很渺茫阿
。求建议！怎么和编辑argue。
Reviewer: 1
Recommendation: Publish in a different journal.
Comments:
This manuscript by Cheng et al describes the nonequlibrium molecular
dynamics for thermal conductivity XXX. The work is carried out carefully and
includes an interesting result related with a thermal conductivity of two
nanomaterials. Although the authors explained the size dependence of
conductivity using non-equilibrium MD, theoretical and experimental studies
about size dependent thermal conductivity of XX have already been described
in literature by many researchers ( J. Hone et al and L. Lindsay et al etc..
). Therefore, the content in this work is lack of novelty in some extent and
not suitable for publication in ACS Nano. I recommend the publication in
more specific journal.
Additional Questions:
Is this paper in the top 15% of manuscripts in the field?: No
If this paper is not in the top 15% of manuscripts in the field: It could be
improved to be in the top 15% with further work.
Is it appealing to a broad audience?: No
Does the manuscript give a complete description of the procedures that could
be reproduced by others in the field?: Yes
Are the conclusions adequately supported by the data?: Yes
Are the literature references appropriate and correct?: Yes
Is the manuscript a comprehensive article/review?: Yes
Significance: Moderate
Novelty: Moderate
Broad interest: Moderate
Scholarly presentation: High
