最近投稿到行业领域顶级的期刊,2个审稿人评价都很好,编辑最终给的意见是直接录
用。想问下编辑发给我的论文录用邮件中的审稿人积极评价内容是否可以作为亮点写进
petition letter。具体审稿意见如下:
Reviewer 1:
The authors of this paper are well-known scientists in coherence optics. In
this paper, they introduced a Schell-type stationary medium with its degree
of potential’s correlation satisfies the Fractional Multi-Gaussian
function. Their results show that the new proposed stationary medium will
give rise to a sharp concave intensity apex in the scattered field and they
gave some potential applications, such as applications to energy counter
problems and particle manipulation by weakly scattered fields. Furthermore,
it is gratifying that the authors gave the descriptions of physically
realization for the new mediums.
The algebras and plots seem to be all right and reasonable. I think it
should be published as it stands.
Reviewer 2:
The authors present a partially coherent source or medium for controlling
light. There is a long history of papers like this being published. The
paper is novel and well written such that minor edits will make it
acceptable.Please see uploaded document for my comments.
请大家给予意见和讨论,对于该类审稿结果邮件中审稿专家比较积极和正面对我工作的
评价是否可以作为论证自己研究major contribution and significant impact。