第一次Decision-Reject & Resubmit
IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology - Decision on Manuscript ID TCST-2006-XXXX
发件人:"XXX"
时 间:2007年3月4日(星期日) 下午23:22
收件人:"XXX"
抄 送:"ieeetcst"
04-Mar-2007
Dear Mr.XXX:
The paper "XXXXXX" reference TCST-2006-XXXX which you submitted for publication to the IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, has been reviewed. Copies of the Associate Editor Report and of the reviews are included at the bottom of this letter.
After consideration of the paper and of the reviews, it is our decision that the paper cannot be accepted for publication in the IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology. It is possible, however, that it could be published as a Brief Paper after significant revision. Suggestions for changes that would increase the likelihood of acceptance are discussed in the Associate Editor Report and in the reviews.
Please note that resubmitting your manuscript does not guarantee eventual acceptance, and that your resubmission will be subject to re-review by the reviewer(s) before a decision is rendered. The revision should adhere to the requirements for a brief paper, currently 16 double-spaced pages including figures.
To submit your revised manuscript, log into [url=http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/tcst]http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/tcst and enter your Author Center. Click on Submit a New Manuscript. In Section 5, Details and Comments of the Submission Process, answer "Yes" to "Has this document been previously submitted?" Add the original paper number in "Manuscipt ID of Previous Submission".
Follow the procedure and upload the revised paper.
When submitting your revised manuscript, include a detailed statement describing the changes made to the paper and refer to the paper number in your letter. In order to expedite the processing of the revised manuscript, please be as specific as possible in your response to the reviewer(s).
Sincerely,
Prof. XXX
Associate Editor, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology
XXX@eng.fsu.edu
Editor-in-Chief's address:
Professor Francis J. Doyle III
Editor-in-Chief
IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology
University of California, Santa Barbara
Chemical Engineering Department
Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5080
ieeetcst@engineering.ucsb.eduAssociate Editors Comments to the Author:
The following issues raised by the reviewers need to be addressed:
1. The issue of observability of the …….
2. Justifiction for estimating …….
3. Tuning of …… parameters.
4. Justification for using …… for this problem.
5. Clearer description of overall control strategy.
6. Stability of identified ……….
Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:
Reviewer: 1
Comments to the Author
This paper presents an interesting application of ……. With revision
this paper could be of similar quality to other papers published in TCST. Following two
issues need to be addressed while revising the manuscript.
…….
Reviewer: 2
Comments to the Author
The authors have provided little motivation for the publication of this paper. …… has been successful because of its ability to handle multivariable systems with constraints. The problem, as presented by the authors, has neither problem. For some reason, …… is applied in a SISO loop to regulate ……, while PI control is used to regulate …….
The paper is poorly written, with many misspellings and a seemingly random placement of content. I see no need to compare … with …. Also, all of the hardware and software details for the implementation of the controller are largely irrelevant. The readers will not care what microprocessor was used, for example.
The … strategy is poorly presented. The classical additive output disturbance assumption is presented in equation (25), yet the point of the paper is to use …….
The overall control strategy is also not clear. The authors use ……, but …… is not shown in any plots.
If the ……, then what is manipulated to handle ……?
How do the authors even guarantee that the ……?