回复专家论文修改意见模板

【SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板】 List of Responses 0.1 Dear Editors and Reviewers: 1.1 Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer's comments concering our manuscript “Title”(ID: ). 1.2 Thank you very much for your careful review and constructive suggestions with regard to our manuscript "Title"(ID). 2.1 Thoses comments are very helpful for us to revise and imporve our paper. 2.2 Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the importance guiding significane to our researches. 3.1 We have studied these comments carefully and tried our best to revise and imporve the manuscript. 3.2 made great changes in the manuscript according to the reviewer's comments. 3.3 We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. 4.1 Our main corrections in the manuscript and the responds to the reviewer's comments are as follows and a PDF file "xxx.pdf" ( main corrections are marked in red and blue color ). 4.2 Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. 5.1 The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer's comments are as following: 6.1 Responds to the reviewer's comments: 6.1.1 Response to comment: [... COMMENT ...] 6.1.2 Response: ... 7.1 We are very sorry for our negligence of ... 7.2 We are very sorry for our incorrect writing ... 7.3 It is really true as Reviewer suggested that ... 7.4 we have made correction according to the Reviewer's comments. 7.5 we have re-write this part to the Reviewer's suggestion. 7.6 As Reviewer suggested that ... 7.7 Considering the Reviewer's suggestion, we have ... 7.8 Thank you for pointing this out. 8.1 Line 22-33, the statements of "... ... " were corrected as "... ..." 8.2 Line 333, "... ..." was added/deleted. 8.3 ... was usde here as .. to ... 8.4 In addition, by studying that, we can directly compare our results with previous studies. 8.5 more details in the first paragraph of Section 3.3. 8.6 A and B's research groups have done blablablabla. However, the focus of our work is on blablabla, which is very different from A and B's work, and this is also the major contribution of our work. 8.7 We have added the following discussion on this issue in our revised manuscript, see ... 9.1 Special thanks to you for your good comments. 3.3 we tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. 4.3 these changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. 5.2 And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper. 9.2 we appreciate Editors/Reviewers' warm work earnestly, and hope the correction will meet with approval. 10.1 once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. list of actions: LOA1: The revised manuscript is double spaced / marked in red / ... LOA2: a paragraph has been added in page 5 to further explain the algorithm ... LOA3: Explanations of the legned of Figure 3 have been added in page 7. LOA4: Fig. 2 has been enlarged / changed / ... LOA5: All typos have been removed.

在回复审稿人意见的时候，诚恳的态度非常关键，最好可以附上一个新的cover letter。当你不同意审稿人的意见时，你可以说“Thank you for your comments. We understand your concern about XXX. However, because YYY. To make this clearer we have changed ZZZ on page/line XX.”首先站在审稿人的角度上去肯定审稿人的意见，然后客观的指出文章的原意，并且做出具体解释。从另一个角度来看，既然审稿人都理解错了，其他的读者更有可能，说明文章的表达还是需要改进的。建议对相关的句子重写，尽量表述得更加清晰。

在这里我们也分享一些常见的回复审稿人模板供题主参考：

当你同意审稿人意见时，可以这样写：

Thank you for your comments. We agree with your suggestion to XXX, because YYY. We have made changes to ZZZ on page/line XX as you suggested.

回复重点要包括以下几项：

方法/技巧

1、套话

在回复审稿人意见的时候，除了写明修改内容外，还有一些话是必须要写的。这个其实也可以归纳为礼貌用语，大家一般也都会注意到。但是，有些时候还是容易“放飞自我”。实验室的一位师兄，花了很长的时间搞出来一个很有idea的文章。

在回复审稿意见的时候，前面还是客客气气的回复，一读到关于自己核心idea的时候，立马心态就炸了，言辞什么的就有点过激了，最后当然直接被拒了。其实能作为审稿人，一般都是这个领域的专家或者有一定贡献的人，既然能指出你的问题，就说明还是存在不合理的地方，那就认认真真去修改就好了，千万不要太持才傲物。

比如在回复的时候，前面加上类似“谢谢您的建议，您的所有建议都非常的重要，它们对我今后的科研工作都具有重要的指导意义”；结尾也可以写上“再次谢谢您的建议，希望能够从您那里学到更多的知识。”像这种类似的套话一定要有，时刻保持谦逊。

2、审稿人意见暂时无法实现

第一种是需要你增加实验或改进实验的时候。.原则上尽量满足，实在是不行的，可适当用能说明原理的替代实验满足。当然如果为了论文尽快发表，需要拒绝这样的要求，也不要列出一堆理由来证明这个意见是不好实现的，这样只会让审稿人认为你在逃避。

还有一种就是评价创新性不足。这种几乎是没法改的。原则是需要准确地概括出本文的核心创新点。当然，首先还是要肯定审稿人说的对，他提出的方法或者已经存在的方法也很好，但本文的核心创新点在于balabala，和已经存在的方法不一样。适当的情况下可以比较下优缺点，加一些这方面的总结（觉得自己归纳的不好就别加了，以防能巧成拙）。

注意！对于这类关于创新不足的意见，一定要好好回复。一旦不被认可的话就会评判为文章没创新点，一个没有创新的文章，很难被录用。

3、审稿人意见有问题

坦白说，概率真的很小，但也不是没有。如果真的遇到了，那也不要太过于激动。大家都是有棱有角的年轻人，血气方刚，自己辛辛苦苦做出来的结果被人否定了当然不爽，尤其是对方还是错误的情况下，发几句牢骚就算了，千万别带到邮件里。子还曾经曰过：人非圣贤孰能无过。要注意言辞，一定不能在文中带有“审稿人的意见是错的”这样的句子。

不要对他的意见发表任何的评论，就在那条审稿意见下，列出你的理由和证据就可以了，也不用刻意强调你的观点是正确的。

4、注意回复时间

把握好回复的时间尺度，原则上是不能让编辑觉得你过于草率，不够重视（更不能超过deadline）。要根据具体的修改意见，掌握好修改时间。即使是minor revision，意见比较少的，只需要花一天甚至几小时搞定的，也不要立刻投回去。

至少一周后再投出去，因为在这一周里你还要充足的时间去检查论文里的小毛病，更重要的是，编辑不会觉得你是在敷衍他。如果是major revision，建议至少三周后再投，修改到尽量符合审稿意见上的要求。否则一旦让你重修，将会浪费更多的时间精力。

觉得自己英语不是很好的童鞋，也不要灰心，其实专业词汇就那些。在这里分享一个简单粗暴提升专业英语水平的方法，直接背。其实看似一篇十几页的论文，文字较多的部分也就开头和结尾多一些（理工科一般这样，其它的不清楚，应该差不多）。注意，背诵的对象一定是大牛或高水平的英文文献。

另外，在我大天朝，有需求就会有市场。不过目前市场上提供论文润色服务的机构鱼龙混杂，挑选的时候一定要独具慧眼。千万别找非专业人员润色，很可能失之毫厘谬以千里，学术论文还是很严谨的。