This is such a scam.

(0) 讚！ | 学术垃圾小喵咪

It's been six months, the reviewers are stuck on two of them, and the third one is missing. Let's analyze, are there any rejections among these two?

(0) 讚！ | 学术小咖

Two weeks after submission, the manuscript was rejected by the editor Kejin Wang, citing a high similarity rate with a previously submitted article. Upon further examination, it was found that the previous submission was on quasi-static analysis, while the current one was on dynamic analysis, indicating that they are completely different. Additionally, a check using iThenticate showed only a 3% similarity with the previous submission.

(0) 讚！ | 关白告

The feeling is related to which editor it is sent to. I have been submitting for 13 days and it is still in the queue.

(0) 讚！ | 关白告

Why did I go from "we" to "ur" in just one day, and then invited four reviewers, all of whom accepted?

(0) 讚！ | Yunoe

What's up with you, buddy? I've also been on a 7-day work binge.

(0) 讚！ | 火鸟不火

4.9 STJ
4.10 WE
4.12 UR (4/3/0)
4.13 UR (4/4/0)
4.21 UR (4/4/1)
Is this speed considered fast?

(0) 讚！ | Yunoe

4.8 submit 
4.9 with editor
4.13 under review (invited 4 reviewers, all accepted)
Is this considered fast?

(0) 讚！ | Yunoe

I'm out of ideas. It's been over two months and only one reviewer has accepted and completed the review. The editor also hasn't invited new reviewers. Can this situation be expedited?

(0) 讚！ | YClC

26.4.18 UR invites 18 individuals to accept a review invitation.

(0) 讚！ | 梦0722

2026.4.16 Add 2 more reviewers for editing.
2026.4.17 Send out 9 invitations, 2 acceptances, 0 completions.

(0) 讚！ | SCUCY

3.5 STJ
3.7 WE UR
3.8 5/3/0
3.28 5/3/1
4.6 5/3/2
The third reviewer has been overdue for almost 20 days, and I don't know if the editor has reminded them or not...

(0) 讚！ | LAccept！！！~

26.3.22 STJ
24.3.26 WE
Too slow, it has been twenty days and still in WE.

(0) 讚！ | 梦0722

25.06.08 Submission
25.07.18 First revision
25.08.30 Second revision
25.10.02 Acceptance
Encountered three reviewers, with two providing positive feedback. However, one reviewer from the Middle East raised some questions regarding green building and suggested some references for the paper, which was about the microstructure of road materials and was not relevant. I politely declined. The second round of reviews resulted in two acceptances and one rejection (still requesting me to cite their paper). The reviewer asked for further revisions. This time, I refused to cite the paper citing a mismatch in research directions, luckily the article was eventually accepted. I don't encourage others to cite or not cite in such situations, but personally, I would still refuse to cite completely irrelevant articles. 

PS: I checked the references recommended by the reviewer and guessed they were their own articles, with over a hundred citations. It seems that many people have been affected by this.

(0) 讚！ | 木村柘哉

24.10.20 Submitted
24.12.02 Revision
24.12.17 Accepted
I have submitted three papers to CBM in the past two years, and the review process has been relatively fast.

(0) 讚！ | 木村柘哉

24.01.08 Submission
24.02.11 Rework
24.03.10 Acceptance
CBM efficiency is really high.

(0) 讚！ | 木村柘哉

We sent it for review for three days, and it was returned for revision a month later, with five reviewers. The speed of the editor is really impressive.

(0) 讚！ | 述一

The review speed of CBM is said to be uneven, but mine is relatively faster. The specific timeline is as follows:
January 25, 2025: Submission
February 14, 2025: First review comments
March 5, 2025: Revision
March 24, 2025: Second review comments
April 1, 2025: Revision
April 19, 2025: Third review comments
April 27, 2025: Revision
May 10, 2025: Acceptance

(1) 讚！ | shepherd94

February 3rd WE UR
March 24th rrc Major revise
April 5th WE UR
April 7th 002
April 8th 012
April 9th 112

(0) 讚！ | Xuanzheng Zhang

Is the editor Bhavna Sharma?

(0) 讚！ | Accept! accept!

In the system's history record, it can be seen that I have been in the review process for a month and a half, and the reviewer has already completed the review. However, the editor has not re-invited me yet, so I have been waiting.

(0) 讚！ | YClC

The editor's identity is still unknown.

(0) 讚！ | SCUCY

Which editor is it?

(0) 讚！ | YClC

12.24 STJ
12.26 WE
12.31 UR 0/0/6
2.21 RRC Major Revision
4.01 STJ R1
4.07 Accept
Thank you for the efficient handling by Mingzhong Zhang, and hope your journal will continue to improve!

(0) 讚！ | 有投必中！！！

2026.3.12 submitted to journal
2026.3.16 Under Review (invited 7, accepted 1, completed 0)
2026.4.7 Under Review (invited 7, accepted 1, completed 0)
Oh my, with just one reviewer, even if the comments come back, how does the editor make a decision? It's too difficult!

(0) 讚！ | SCUCY