Submitted on January 4th, revised on March 5th, returned for further revisions on March 18th, and production started on March 30th. The progress is very fast!

(0) 讚！ | Blade

Hello, may I ask if the repair is major or minor?

(0) 讚！ | deeff

The editor is very responsible, and has a high requirement for the originality of the manuscript. The editing suggestions are very professional and have greatly improved the quality of the manuscript. Finally, I wish AEU to continue to improve and do better.

(0) 讚！ | cc小王子

Submitted in July, accepted in October. After two rounds of revisions, although minor revisions were requested, the actual difficulty was comparable to major revisions, involving additional theoretical derivations and experimental validations. Overall, the reviewers were very professional, with high requirements for innovation, leading to a significant improvement in the quality of the article.

(0) 讚！ | headkeeperr

Hello, may I ask if I can add a contact to inquire?

(0) 讚！ | 中中中666！

Submitted in April, underwent a major revision, and accepted in August. The reviewer was quite professional, and the quality of the manuscript was improved after incorporating their suggestions. There were already over 1000 submissions in April, so the competition was still tough.

(1) 讚！ | 557k

The editor of this journal is very responsible, and the reviewers are not overly critical. They ask professional questions and suggest improvements for the manuscript. Submitted on April 28th, received a revision request in mid-June, resubmitted in early July, and accepted for publication in early August.

(0) 讚！ | 满满纷纷

It has been three days since RRC, is this a rejection?

(0) 讚！ | 睡得早起得晚

Three months online, three reviewers provided nearly 20 comments, and we wrote several pages of responses. The journal's efficiency is very high.

(0) 讚！ | Champion_Wong

2025.4.2 Submission
2025.4.30 Minor revision
2025.5.22 Revision
20256.7 Acceptance

(0) 讚！ | 咖啡猫

2025.1.1: Submit
2025.1.28: Minor revisions
2025.2.26: Submit modification suggestions
2025.3.5: Acceptance

(0) 讚！ | zhangym

Submitted on June 27, 2024
Minor revisions on August 27, 2024
Major revisions on October xx, 2024
Accepted on November 10, 2024

(0) 讚！ | xiaoweibing

Is there anything else? How about the appeal process?

(0) 讚！ | cwang22

A very good journal.

(0) 讚！ | 帅帅扶

Why does the journal recommended to me by the editor after rejection have no connection to my article or any constructive feedback on lack of innovation?

(0) 讚！ | Luka_winter

May I ask what the situation is when a dip occurs after RRC?

(0) 讚！ | jashkAH

Does the appearance of DIP after RRC mean rejection?

(0) 讚！ | jashkAH

Numb, numb, a piece is missing

(0) 讚！ | JAIJDWIH

Just check the official website

(0) 讚！ | JAIJDWIH

You basically have no chance, I also submitted 2 papers for review and both were rejected

(0) 讚！ | JAIJDWIH

Hello, I will also know the results in less than two weeks after reviewing, it seems like it's going to be a tragedy if the review is too quick

(0) 讚！ | lailailailai

Can you send the template to my email? It keeps showing errors

(0) 讚！ | 天天000

The journal's LaTeX template provided on the official website is quite user-friendly. The review speed is acceptable and the questions raised are very professional. However, the lack of innovation makes it difficult to submit. It is challenging to meet the limited innovation requirement. The reviewers have strict quality control over the articles and have high standards for innovation, but even after rejection, they recommend other journals

(0) 讚！ | JAIJDWIH

Submitted on October 6, 2023, accepted on December 15, 2023, taking a little over two months. Reviewed by two reviewers, both provided feedback, with about 3 comments each, appreciating the work and directly stating "good work". However, the reviewers were quite stringent, expressing doubts about the accuracy of the methods used, requesting the names of all the calculation and simulation software used, as well as requiring mathematical proofs for the results. In addition, one reviewer made three supplementary suggestions, requesting detailed explanations, which actually increased the workload.
Overall, the journal was author-friendly, but the peer review was strict, with a requirement for innovation and surprisingly, a request for comparison with industry results. In summary, it is a good journal with a requirement for innovation, thorough peer review comments, and a reasonable revision process. Previously a Q2 journal, now bumped up to Q3. Hoping for further improvement of this journal

(0) 讚！ | 苏格斯坦

The elimination rate is very high. My submission number in October has already exceeded two thousand. It is estimated that there are at least 3000 articles submitted each year, but only around three hundred are finally accepted. The elimination rate is astonishing. However, it must be said that the editors and reviewers are much more professional compared to some Elsevier journals in the field of microelectronics, and the efficiency is also relatively high. The first review takes about 1 month, with 1 accept, 1 major revision, and 1 minor revision estimated. In the end, the editor gave a major revision. The second review takes 20 days, with all reviewers agreeing to accept it, and the editor directly gave an accept. Overall, the efficiency is quite high, and it is still worth submitting for some innovative work

(1) 讚！ | eehe