pdaaaa畢業(yè)論文心得分享我的投稿經(jīng)歷-酸甜苦辣-文庫(kù)吧資料
2024-08-17 10:07本頁(yè)面
【正文】 rates where the numerical calculations are more precise orprovide better understanding of the physics.The style of the paper is not appropriate and should be revised bya native English speaker. I remend to reject the paper.不過(guò)沮喪歸沮喪，生活還得繼續(xù)，繼續(xù)改投吧，好在第一個(gè)審稿人給我指明了一條生路，那就是改投Journal of Applied Physics，于是，本人按照審稿人的意見又改了一些。 Suggestions: Report of the First Referee /The paper aims at the numerical solution of the set of Schroedingerand Poisson equations for a splitgate structure and subsequentapplication of the results to calculation of quantizedacoustoelectric current.The paper is sound and well written. However, in my view, it does notcontain enough new physics to warrant its publication in the PhysicalReview. Since the work seems to be useful to people involved inoptimizing standards of electrical current I remend to resubmit thepaper to a journal more specialized on applications, such as theJournal of Applied Physics.Report of the Second Referee /The subject of the paper is an interesting one, although the focus ofthe munity has shifted away from it in the meantime. Neverthelessthe paper would be worth publishing if it gave better evidence in theinteresting electron transport mechanism prevailing in this effect.Specifically the authors present numerical results for the potentialin a SAW driven splitgate induced small channel. They claimin the abstract that the potential barrier heights calculatedin the closedchannelregime agree well with the experiment weperformed. To my understanding they (implicitly) claim that theirnumerical method provides better understanding of the SETSAW effectand that it should allow for a better design of such devices.However, they do not give any experimental result to support theirclaim. The quantitative results of the numerical calculationscould prove their superiority by parison with experimentalresult obtained from correspondingly tailored devices, but theauthors only repeat general statements like ...agrees very wellwith experiment., without presenting experiments. Without specificparisons the reader (if he knows the literature well) just learnsthat there is a kind of qualitative agreement. But such qualitative,and even semiquan
數(shù)學(xué)相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號(hào)-1