请注意，这个活动只限于18岁以上的成年人参加。

(0) 讚！ | 一只小松鼠

This journal is shameless, deliberately rejecting people.

(0) 讚！ | 热爱科研的人

Can you give me back ten points? Haha. Two years, it's really time-consuming.

(0) 讚！ | 热爱科研的人

After two years of experience, finally accepted, basically the same as others' experiences. Four rounds of revisions, the last two rounds were also for issues related to image clarity, language, etc. About 3 months for each round of revisions, a new submission was made after completing the four rounds of revisions, and it was finally accepted.

(0) 讚！ | RMS85

Accepted on 26.06, submitted on 24.08. Two to three rounds of major revisions in between. Mainly due to the fact that one of the reviewers dropped out and had to be re-invited.

(0) 讚！ | sa123

When I received the rejection letter, I was so angry that I felt paralyzed.
Submitted twice over the course of two years, rejected after five rounds of review.
1. Submitted on July 3, 2024, editor requested revisions.
2. First review in October 2024, one major revision, one minor revision. Revised the model, expanded experiments, submitted in November.
3. Second review in April 2025: one suggested publication, one rejection. Originally focused on industry, editor requested inclusion of financial and biological validation. Submitted at the end of April.
4. Third review in September 2025: only editorial comments. Required improving image clarity and formula readability. Completed revisions and resubmitted in mid-October.
5. Fourth review in January 2026: marked as AE recommendation. Agreed with suggestions, asked for recent literature additions and page reductions. Submitted in early February.
6. On February 11, 2026, tracking system showed invitation to a reviewer who accepted. As of now, the system still indicates the reviewer has not completed the review, possibly abandoned.
7. Rejected on June 30, 2026: Rev3 provided four suggestions, stating lack of real industrial deployment in the first, and absence of recent method comparisons in the rest. I seriously doubt if this Rev3 is a legitimate reviewer or just a program disguised as one. With a review process lasting two years and each revision taking 4-6 months, how can I possibly provide you with the latest systematic critiques and comparisons of advanced methods in the field?
My PhD graduation is now on the line. I hope everyone encounters ethical editors and journals, and never have to go through what I did.

(0) 讚！ | USTBer

It is indeed a prestigious journal, same experience.

(0) 讚！ | 热爱科研的人

The first time I submitted editorial feedback with issues, I sent an email to the editor but received no response, and the manuscript was automatically withdrawn when the deadline passed. The second submission had only minor issues, but there has been no response since it was submitted in January. I have followed up with the editor three times to no avail. Have any of your friends had recent acceptances?

(0) 讚！ | Jiayan Yu

This is the most difficult article I have ever submitted, it was rejected after five rounds of review over two years.

Here is the specific timeline:
1. Submitted in October 2024
2. Completed the first round of review in November 2024: 2 reviewers, 1 disappeared, 1 accepted after major revisions
3. Completed the second round of review in March 2025: 1 new reviewer, accepted after major revisions
4. Completed the third round of review in June 2025: 2 new reviewers, accepted after major revisions
5. Completed the fourth round of review in October 2025: major revisions based on editorial feedback
6. Rejected in June 2026

Good luck to everyone~

(0) 讚！ | 守望者

I just found out that I have not contributed any new datasets and must use real industry data.

(0) 讚！ | HIT_zzh

Is this for real? Who exactly wrote the article in this journal?

(0) 讚！ | XXXXRRRR

End of December 24: Submitted
End of January 25: Major revision, revised in mid-March
End of April 25: Major revision, revised at the end of May. New reviewer assigned
End of June 25: Major revision, revised at the end of July. Few comments
Early September 25: Minor revision, revised in mid-September. Few comments, system showed reviewer completed, status remained with editor
End of January 26: Minor revision, revised at the end of February. Both reviewers accepted, editor took 4 months to provide comments, stated no new dataset contribution accepted and requested to update related work to the latest. Since revision, status remained submitted to journal. Considering withdrawing if it remains like this by June.
Editor seems inactive, cautious about submitting. Know a deputy editor of CII, asked for help, but still no effect. Suspect editor thinks the paper is too old and doesn't want it, rejecting it will affect submission data.
Journal is good but cautious about submission.

(0) 讚！ | 天成

It's useless. After the reminder, the iThenticate system will send you a message and inform you of the status, but it doesn't have any effect.

(0) 讚！ | 天成

Very slow, especially from 25 to 26, the reviewers had no comments, the editor gave 3 opinions, saying that without original industrial dataset, it cannot be accepted. Then another batch of datasets were obtained for experiments and revised again. From the end of February until now, it has been continuously submitted to the journal.

(0) 讚！ | 天成

Has anyone tried to rush the submission or contact Elsevier customer service to rush the submission within the system? Is it effective?

(0) 讚！ | XXXXRRRR

I'm glad that I have already graduated. This trashy journal, I submitted my paper in January last year, and it has already gone through four rounds of reviews. The reviewers have long ago said there is no problem, is the editor dead?

(0) 讚！ | lee

The fifth round of review was completed in October 25th, after revision for 10 months. Finally, the manuscript became "Under Review" in mid to late January following the SSC-With-1 round of review. However, one of the reviewers disappeared. The other reviewer also seemed to be in need of some "treatment", as there was no response for two months after resubmission. To summarize, the manuscript was submitted in October 24th, and all reviewers in the first four rounds of review, except for one who disappeared, had accepted the manuscript. Then, unexpectedly, the fifth round of review came with some inexplicable comments.

(0) 讚！ | 守望者

Editor-in-chief Raymond had sent a message to Arthur on 26.2.24 asking for a decision on the paper to be executed by the editor-in-chief, but still has not provided any updates. I really don't understand what this journal is up to.

(0) 讚！ | HIT_zzh

Since November 23, 25 years ago, there have been no changes. Despite being reminded by Aiswell customer service at least four times and receiving email replies from the editor, there has been no progress. It is suspected that the editor may have not been working for a long time, and it is unclear what is happening. We are ready to withdraw the submission.

(0) 讚！ | HIT_zzh

Has anyone checked the status of the recent submission lately? It has been under review for a month after being submitted for review again.

(0) 讚！ | mangohoho

A journal without publication.

(1) 讚！ | ad123

Submit with caution, as the process may be slow.

(0) 讚！ | alphachx

Submit your work carefully.

(0) 讚！ | alphachx

Yes, I am also an editor. I was editing and revising, and then sent it out for review again.

(0) 讚！ | XXXXRRRR

Moved~~~ but then sent for review~~~ this is the first journal that I don't understand.

(0) 讚！ | Dr.NTU 大不列颠