The revised part The first reviewer
نویسندگان
چکیده
Ti Liu ([email protected]) Zhenqiang Bi ([email protected]) Xianjun Wang ([email protected]) Zhong Li ([email protected]) Shunjun Ding ([email protected]) Zhenwang Bi ([email protected]) liansen Wang ([email protected]) shaoxia song ([email protected]) shengyang zhang ([email protected]) yaoqwen pei ([email protected]) bo pang ([email protected]) lin sun ([email protected]) jie lei ([email protected]) qun yuan ([email protected]) zengqiang Kou ([email protected]) bin yang ([email protected]) yuelong shu ([email protected]) kaishun lu ([email protected]) jun liu ([email protected]) aiqiang xu ([email protected]) dapeng sun ([email protected]) jianxing wang ([email protected]) xiaolin jiang ([email protected]) lei yang ([email protected]) xiyan Li ([email protected]) tao zhang ([email protected])
منابع مشابه
Quantification of the PBAP contribution to giant CCN An analysis of the contribution to simulated freezing rates at the sites of the field
We thank the editor for the opportunity to respond to reviewer comments and for taking the time to consider a revised manuscript. We also thank the reviewers for their time and for their comments on our manuscript. We respond to the reviewer comments in detail below. To guide the review process, reviewer comments are in italics, our responses are in normal text. We also attach a revised manuscr...
متن کاملInteractive comment on “OMI measured increasing SO2 emissions due to energy industry expansion and relocation in Northwestern China” by Zaili Ling et al
First of all, we would like to thank the reviewer for his/her comments and suggestions which significantly improve the presentations and interpretations in our revised manuscript. Based on the reviewers’ comments, we have made major revisions to the manuscript. The revised manuscript and supporting information are attached to Supplement. The reviewers’ original comments and our responses are as...
متن کاملReview History of 2009ja015069
Below and/or attached are two reviews of the above manuscript. I am pleased to report that Reviewer #1 finds the manuscript acceptable for publication but Reviewer #2 still has some strong concerns. I have some sympathy with the view expressed in your covering letter, that Reviewer #2 may have a biased attitude. However, it would be inappropriate for me to entirely ignore their comments, so I p...
متن کاملA Bayesian Model for Calibrating Reviewer Scores
A typical technical conference involves each submission being reviewed by several reviewers of different expertise, preference of technique, and attention to detail. Furthermore, some reviewers have a tendency to give high scores, some reviewers low. These are detrimental for the overall quality of the reviewing. Can we estimate the reviewer bias scientifically? Here we first review a method fo...
متن کاملTitle: a Six Question Screen to Facilitate Primary Cardiovascular Disease Prevention
Author’s response to reviews: Reviewer #1: This is a very interesting and well-written manuscript that describes a comprehensive analysis performed by the authors. I do not have any suggestion in order to improve the quality of this paper. Reply: We thank the reviewer for reviewing our manuscript and her kind comments. Reviewer #2: The paper is well written, the goal is good and the statistic i...
متن کاملDesigning and validating a curriculum model for Higher Education System in Iran
The purpose of present study was to design and validate a curriculum model for higher education system in Iran. This study was conducted by using a mixed exploratory design: Instrument Development Model. First, in qualitative part of this study, a questionnaire consisted of 14 components and 107 sub-components was developed by using Grounded Theory approach and interviews with 25 experts. The...
متن کامل