X
My Account Submit My Manuscript
Letpub, Scientific Editing Services, Manuscript Editing Service

REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS

   For Publishers  New

Browse Journals by Title


Journal name:   ISSN:   Subject area:   IF range: -
Index:   Category:   Open Access:   Sort by:
Journal Cover Design
FREE Webinar: Understanding Research Metrics: What Really Matters?

[REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS]Hello, you are Visitor Number 59891 on this page.

Journal Profile
Journal TitleREVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS
Journal Title AbbreviationsREV SCI INSTRUM
ISSN0034-6748
E-ISSN1089-7623
h-index145
CiteScore
CiteScoreSJRSNIPCiteScore Rank
3.100.6250.899
Subject fieldQuartilesRankPercentile
Category: Physics and Astronomy
Subcategory: Instrumentation
Q238 / 129

Self-Citation Ratio (2019-2020)12.00%
Official Websitehttp://rsi.aip.org/
Online Manuscript Submissionhttp://rsi.peerx-press.org/cgi-bin/main.plex
Open AccessNo
PublisherAMER INST PHYSICS, CIRCULATION & FULFILLMENT DIV, 2 HUNTINGTON QUADRANGLE, STE 1 N O 1, MELVILLE, USA, NY, 11747-4501
Subject AreaEngineering
Country/Area of PublicationUNITED STATES
Publication FrequencyMonthly
Year Publication Started0
Annual Article Volume951
Indexing (SCI or SCIE)Science Citation Index
Science Citation Index Expanded
Link to PubMed Central (PMC)https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog?term=0034-6748%5BISSN%5D
Average Duration of Peer Review *Authorized Data from Publisher:
Data from Authors: About 3.1 month(s)
Competitiveness *Data from Authors: 83%
Useful Links
Relevant Journals 【REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS】CiteScore Trend
Comments from Authors
*All review process metrics, such as acceptance rate and review speed, are limited to our user-submitted manuscripts. As such they may not reflect the journals' exact competitiveness or speed.
  • Journals in the Same Subject Area
  • CiteScore Trend


First    Previous    1    Next    Last  (To Page
/1)
  Reviews on REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS: Write a review
Author: 大头


Subject Area: Engineering
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-09-06 21:39:36
It took 108 days from submission to acceptance. It took 23 days for the first review. Reviewer 1 recommended "Resubmitting after revised", thinking that the article had no technical innovation and no logical structure. Reviewer 2 raised a number of technical issues and the evaluation was very positive. I think review 1 did not understand my article, and briefly introduced the content and background points in the reply. Review 2’s comments were normal replies. In the second review comments, review 2 said it was OK. Review 1 thought that the technology was indeed innovative, but the English was poor, and the logic was not good (in fact, I had polished the manuscript before submission). With the idea that "the reviewers are all right", I addressed the comments carefully one by one, and made substantial additions and deletions to the article. What’s more, I changed a lot of subtitle of the article. Review 1 sent back comments in a day. But the associate editor kept it for about 10 days before returning it to me, then required minor revisions on language and pointed out a general outline. I continued to modify and send the manuscript back. Then decision of the fourth review was received. I changed one sentence and one word. The associate editor agreed to accept in approximately 7 days after submission. Feelings: I provided 5 reviewers, three of whom are foreigners. The characteristic of review 1 was that the questions he raised were too general to deal with, and new questions came out after the correction, which were more cumbersome. Half of the 108 days were spent on the operation of the associate editor. It may be busy around the summer vacation. Only late at night on weekends was the operation sent for review or revision emails. The quality of the article has been greatly improved, thanks!

(18) Thank | 大头

Author: 蓝之魂灵


Subject Area: Engineering
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-07-09 10:27:35
My first article was relatively bumpy. It experienced rejection and resubmission, and got accepted after a total of 341 days. Each step will be listed in detail in the status, letting you know what progress the article is currently in. Initial submission: Submitted on October 19, 2016, and 2 reviewers assigned on November 23. The review speed is not bad. Both comments came back on December 10. I got a Decision Letter on December 15. One rejection, one major revision. The editor rejected it and agreed a resubmission after revision. Resubmission: manuscript resubmitted on March 12, 2017, 2 reviewers assigned on March 24, the two review comments returned on April 5, and Decision Letter received on April 13. One major revision and one minor revision. The editor gave us 2 months for us to modify. Continued to submit: May 14, 2017, revised manuscript returned; May 22, sent to a reviewer. It should be the one requiring major revision. June 21, the review comments returned; June 26, the Decision Letter received, and it still required a major revision in the comments, and we got 2 months for revision. Still need to submit: The revised manuscript was returned on August 21, 2017. Maybe the reviewer in the last review didn’t respond. The editor had been looking for additional reviewers, and finally found the reviewer on September 15. Review comments returned on September 20, and it was accepted on September 25. After going through ups and downs, fortunately, it was finally accepted.

(9) Thank | 蓝之魂灵

Author: 吃鸡的炉宗弟子


Subject Area: Engineering
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-02-15 18:34:03
The review speed is relatively fast, and the first round of review is returned one and a half months after submission. Two reviewers, one recommended “publish as is”, the other: “reconsider after revisions”, the editor did not give advice. The second reviewer's comments were very detailed, and 10 comments were made on everything from the literature to the experiment to the level of detail. The revision took 20 days. After 10 days, the second review came back, and the second reviewer gave a rejection. The reason was that there was no comparison with existing products. (The layer master and the reference sample were compared, and there is no product of the same type.) This reviewer also noted the lack of a thermal vacuum environment test (the main article focuses on the improvement of the mechanical properties of the prototype, not only in aerospace applications, but also in the laboratory and does not have environmental test conditions available). In short, I feel that the reviewer 2 did not read this article and the deputy editor finally gave the rejection. The process lasted 3 months.

(0) Thank | 吃鸡的炉宗弟子

Author: 黄土地


Subject Area: Engineering
Duration of Peer Review: 11.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-01-05 10:52:06
from submission to recruitment, more than three hundred days.When I submitted the manuscript, I was still in the three districts. When I was acceptd, I changed into four districts.The review is too slow, and each state changes to one and a half months, too slow
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 黄土地

Author: 你的忧伤我不懂


Subject Area: Engineering
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-12-20 13:29:26
18 editions of the Chinese Academy of Sciences actually fell to the four districts, it is really no reason!!!
Show Review in Original Language
(2) Thank | 你的忧伤我不懂

Author: huichuang1985@yahoo.com


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2017-09-20 10:42:49
Speed ​​can be completed and submitted for 3 months.2016.11With editor;2017.01Minor revision;2017.02Accept.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | huichuang1985@yahoo.com

Author: Promising Man


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 5.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2017-08-25 14:34:57
review for manuscript: nealy a monthTime for revise :half a monthReview for revised version: nealy two monthTime for sending a decision letter: half a monthAn authority journal! Hope make it again!
Show Review in Original Language
(2) Thank | Promising Man

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2013-10-08 20:55:00
Instrument.The editor sends it to the reviewer within a week, and the rest of the time depends on the reviewer.
Show Review in Original Language
(1) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area:
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2013-08-31 00:25:00
This should be considered an authoritative journal, although the impact factor is not very high.Compared with other AIP journals, the processing speed is relatively slow (I selectd for a pop, the editors concluded after a few hours or so after the review, and rsi was separated for several days).At the time, the editor said that my English was very poor. After the revision, the reviewer said that the expression had been clearly expressed, and the editor was not embarrassed.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Mathematical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2013-05-31 09:34:00
This journal is very powerful. It was selectd on May 17th and was sent to the reviewer within the same day. The reviewer gave feedback in 4 days, the minor repair was used, and the reviewer was on the 24th.After the comments were revised, they will receive a formal acceptance notice on the 25th.In short, the speed is very strong, it is my fastest submission, and it is faster than the previous OL.Basically, I sent it out on the submission system at 10 o'clock in the evening. After four or five minutes of editing, I responded.
Show Review in Original Language
(1) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area:
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2013-05-09 17:47:00
has been posting an article for more than a month, and editing the manuscript is very fast.Since the reviewers were not written, the two reviewers who the editors found did not respond, so it is better to write a few reviewers.Submitted for 121 days.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Mathematical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2013-04-03 15:04:00
has participated in a conference, the conference article is included in the RSI, the review speed is fast, the internet speed is faster
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Mathematical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2013-01-10 11:09:00
AIP's journal, the processing speed is very fast, my first trial took 2 days, then the reviewer, within a weekWhen the reviewer was found, a reviewer gave a week to return to the revised opinion and received it directly. The whole process took half a month.After half a month, it was proofed, and it was published in 40 days. It will be available online.I personally feel that the article is not particularly brilliant, but it must be detailed and not empty. I put all the indicators into one point. The innovation of the article is applied but it is not particularly good. The English expression must be revised.There can be no grammatical and logical errors, especially the writing of abstracts is critical.Objectively speaking, this submission has certain luck components, but the overall feeling is not difficult. Some applications can be innovative above, and there is no problem in language expression. Basically
Show Review in Original Language
(1) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area:
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2012-10-09 20:47:00
is worthy of submission.The review speed is fast, and there will be results in February.After receiving, the publication speed is also fast.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Information Science
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2012-06-27 14:16:00
I feel that the speed is OK. I will change my opinion in two months. Minor repair, I accepted it every few days after the modification, and now I am waiting for the article number!I feel that the journal is good, very rigorous, and I feel a bit high on English writing requirements!
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Mathematical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2012-06-01 18:28:00
This journal is of good quality and free of print.When reviewing the manuscript, he valued the method innovation and technicality. The reviewers were more expert and more likely to evaluate the writing of the paper.Therefore, it is necessary to make more efforts in technical description and writing when submitting a manuscript.The online submission system is easy to use, and the publishing speed is relatively fast after the recording. Usually, it can be published online within one month after the recruitment.In contrast, recent manuscripts in Note format have been reviewed faster than in the past (the reviewer is one person), and some manuscripts can be fixed in more than a month.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area:
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2012-04-12 23:07:00
Good journal.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2012-03-15 20:08:00
Speed ​​is a bit slow
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2011-12-27 15:22:00
Magazine is more authoritative, rigorous!
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2011-08-21 11:53:00
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Mathematical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2011-05-03 09:49:00
very much value the reviewer's opinion, the process is slower
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area: Information Science
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2011-03-29 22:13:00
review is very careful, but the speed is a bit slow
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area:
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2011-03-25 14:57:00
is very authoritative and requires meticulous work.Like general mechanical journals, the influence factor is difficult to rise.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

Author: Anonymous


Subject Area:
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result:


Write a review

Reviewed 2011-03-24 23:37:00
Instrumentation R&D field authoritative journal
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Anonymous

First    Previous    1    Next    Last  (To Page
/1)

Start your review of [REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS]:





Disclaimer: All information sourced directly from the journals is subject to change. Please use the journal homepage link to verify all information prior to submission.


© 2010-2021  ACCDON LLC 400 5th Ave, Suite 530, Waltham, MA 02451, USA
PrivacyTerms of Service