[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 168 KB, 727x682, 1465938273217.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8594813 No.8594813 [Reply] [Original]

I got a paper rejected today. No errors found. One reviewer gave a green light, but another said that the contribution was low and the editor decided to stick with the second one.

Feels bad. No errors. Still a rejection. Yes another half a year is lost.

Seems that it's impossible to start a new topic even in mid-tear journals. Have to lower standards even more.

>> No.8594828

>>8594813

Literally just submit to another journal.
Work on your next paper.

>> No.8594837

>>8594813
fucking nerd

>> No.8594862

>>8594813
What field is this?

>half a year lost

Is it experimental work?

>> No.8594864

>>8594813
Submit to a different journal

>> No.8594866

>>8594862
Math

>> No.8594977

>>8594866
What area were/are you researching?

>> No.8594983

>>8594977
Something related to theoretical CS

>> No.8594985

is it up on arxiv yet?
if yes, link

>> No.8594988

>>8594985
Are you serious?

>> No.8595009

>>8594988
yes
this isn't biology, your being the primal source is secured by an arxiv post and you probably can't make money with your findings

>> No.8595011

>>8594983
Triple integrals?

>> No.8595022

>>8595011

Even better, triple recursion.

>> No.8595024

>>8595009
Sorry, but I prefer to keep my name unknown. Is it not natural?

>> No.8595045

>>8594813
"No errors" is the absolute baseline for being not complete trash, not an indication that it should be accepted. "No errors" is the "nice guy" of reviewing: It is just next to "shit".

>another said that the contribution was low
this on the other side is valuable feedback

>impossible to start a new topic even in mid-tear journals
>theoretical cs
If it is new, go to a conferences like everybody in CS and get your feedback there

>> No.8595057

>>8595024
well, it doesn't really matter on /sci/. I've posted videos and called for reading and participation, nothing bad comes from it

>> No.8595058

>>8595045

This. CS disseminate research in top conferences not journals.

>> No.8595059

>>8595058
>>8595045
It's somewhat related to it, but it's not CS. Nevermind.

>> No.8595062

>>8595059
Just post it, remove the name if you are a paranoid faggot

>> No.8595069
File: 72 KB, 210x230, 1481440254001.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8595069

>>8595062

>> No.8595113

>>8594813
It got rejected for the first time and you're already complaining? I hope you dont play in the lottery.

>> No.8595118

>>8594813

if you're confident in your work can you actually post it?

thanks

>> No.8595127

>>8595113

he's gonna be in for a wild ride if he wants to keep publishing

manuscripts rejected all the time

>> No.8595132

>>8595127
>>8595118

Where do you people get financing if you get regular rejections?

>> No.8595141

What's stopping the person who reads your paper to evaluate it from claiming it as their own?

>> No.8595152

>>8595132
Rejection is a part of the process I think, I would guess that's how it is with journals anyway. I guess you would just apply to the next one. They're selective of what they publish. I'm just talking in general though, I don't know how it is in the science world

>> No.8595176

>>8595141
The editor.

>> No.8595177

>>8595152
It is, didn't mean to ask it in a demeaning way, just wondering how things working in academic fields, since it's not where I'm (nor am heading to).

Good luck OP, don't be disheartened by a failure. Rant it for awhile, and onwards.

>> No.8595187

>>8594828
this

>> No.8595270

>>8595057
eyyy I know you. Well done man, love ya

>> No.8595609

>>8594813
I got a rejection on fucking Christmas. Came from Australia so I guess it was the 26th. Reviews were 2/3 good but the journal had like a 10% acceptance rate. Basically if its a top 5 journal you'll need all the reviewers to agree. Even a reject and two accept w/ minor revisions has a high probability of rejection by the HE.

>> No.8596530

>>8594813
Can we read it?

>> No.8596535

>>8596530
sure

>> No.8596742

>>8596535
post it

>> No.8597209

Just got my first journal manuscript accepted with revisions. I had 2 reviewers accept and 1 decline. I guess the editor thought 2/3 was good enough.

The revisions are due on Monday. My adviser is reviewing my changes now.

I'm kinda worried because I did not make a bunch of the changes they requested. But I have good reasons for not doing them and I explained in my comments to reviewers. I guess we'll see what happens.

>> No.8597240

>>8597209
I regret to inform you that your paper on, "Extraterrestrial Objects and Their Effects on Anal Stimulation" was denied for publication due to use of confidential data used by the United States Air Force.

>> No.8597363

I had a really great idea for something in my field. It didn't require any ressources either so I worked on it in my free time. When I was half way done after like 4 month of putting every free minute into it, someone else published the same Idea I had. Literally everything was the same. Still mad about this

>> No.8597501

>>8597209
>I did not make a bunch of the changes they requested
The absolute mettman.

>> No.8597532
File: 84 KB, 1920x1080, maxresdefault.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8597532

>>8595069
what? you can publish it here, anon