OP, my paper has just been submitted to UR, but I can't log in to the old system. When I try to register, it says that the account already exists. Have you ever encountered this situation before?

(0) 讚！ | 珂珂

After the second review, the manuscript was accepted. Thanks to the editor-in-chief, thanks to the AE, thanks to the reviewers. The whole process took six months.

(0) 讚！ | rwafdxd

I submitted it two days earlier than you and also in the same condition.

(1) 讚！ | 大白猴

Hello, OP. Have you ever experienced "ar -> awaiting reviewer score"? The manuscript has been in the second round of review for half a month, and now it has changed to this status. Does this mean a new reviewer has been assigned?

(0) 讚！ | rwafdxd

Envious, my AE has been on pause for almost half a month.

(0) 讚！ | rwafdxd

3.12 Awaiting Reviewer Assignment.

(0) 讚！ | Berlinyuuu

This journal has such a bad reputation and the review process is so slow for a reason. It's my fault for being stubborn and thinking it was an exception at the time. Now I realize it's because I was too young. I hope you are accepted, but I won't be submitting to this journal again in the future.

(0) 讚！ | tzwang519

I'm not sure either. Anyway, I wrote over 40 pages of response for the major revision, then conducted 8 additional experiments. The new reviewer didn't even look at them, saying I didn't compare with the most recent technology. The key is that the latest technology is not in the same direction as mine. Also, giving a paper with only the conference name and no specific article is wrong. I seriously suspect it was reviewed by GPT. Furthermore, this journal even asked me to review other people's submissions, showing how unreliable it is.

(0) 讚！ | tzwang519

Why invite new reviewers? Isn't it supposed to be returned to the original reviewers if revisions are made within the specified time frame?

(0) 讚！ | 给我狠狠地Accept

Why invite new reviewers for the second review? Isn't it said that as long as it is returned for revision within the specified time, it will still be sent back to the original reviewer?

(0) 讚！ | 给我狠狠地Accept

Why invite new reviewers for the second review? Isn't it supposed to be sent back to the original reviewer as long as the revisions are made within the specified time frame?

(0) 讚！ | 给我狠狠地Accept

Yes, I was rejected. The expert requested for the second review didn't even understand my field at all. The paper they asked me to compare with wasn't even related to my area of expertise. It's completely absurd that they rejected me.

(0) 讚！ | tzwang519

Have you been rejected? I have been waiting for the first review for almost a year, with major revisions requested by two reviewers. The manuscript has just been sent back for revisions after the second review.

(1) 讚！ | 给我狠狠地Accept

The first review took one year to receive, with major revisions suggested by two professional reviewers. I responded with a 40-page reponse addressing all the experiments. After waiting for half a year for the second review, the reviewers were suddenly changed and ignored the previous feedback. The new comments were completely off base, making me feel like they didn't understand the topic at all. This wasted a year and a half of my time. I have decided to blacklist this journal, and I urge others to carefully consider before submitting to it. This journal is a total nightmare!

(0) 讚！ | tzwang519

2.26 submitted Awaiting Editor-in-Chief Processing. I heard this journal is very slow, not sure how long it will take for review. The waiting is endless.

(0) 讚！ | Berlinyuuu

I sent two reminders and one inquiry letter to the editor-in-chief, but did not receive any response.

(0) 讚！ | 给我狠狠地Accept

May I ask if there is a limit on the number of pages for the initial submission to this publication?

(0) 讚！ | XX啊

Submitted on 13th January 2025
First review on 5th April 2025 (major revision, reviewed by 3 reviewers)
Resubmission on 15th April 2025
Waiting for decision on 26th June 2025
Second review on 4th July 2025 (major revision, reviewed by 3 reviewers)
Submitted as new on 16th July 2025
Waiting for recommendation on 15th January 2026
Waiting for decision on 16th January 2026
Rejected on 1st February 2026
Each round of review had new reviewers added, with reminders sent in early December that the latest round of reviewer invitations would end by the end of the month. Reminders were sent again in mid-January, with responses indicating that the process was still ongoing. The whole process lasted over a year, with approximately 7 different reviewers involved. The time span was too long and not friendly to those who were in a rush to graduate. It is advised to be cautious.

(0) 讚！ | Maurelle

The decision is explained in the email.

(0) 讚！ | jxli2022

I want to ask, is the status "Resubmit as New" directly displayed like this, or does the email tell you to resubmit?

(0) 讚！ | 落星河

Submitted 29-Sep-2024
Major Revision 06-Feb-2025
Resubmitted 13-Mar-2025
Reject and Resubmit 01-Sep-2025 Two reviewers have accepted the manuscript, with one providing some minor comments. IEEE TRel's policy only requires two rounds of review. Therefore, I am resubmitting the manuscript again. The journal's processing speed is too slow, and I am concerned about the mental health of the first author of this paper - a doctoral student.
Resubmit 4-Sep-2025
Awaiting Recommendation 15-Dec-2025

(0) 讚！ | 塔塔100

Returned, the first revision involved many reviewers.

(0) 讚！ | rwafdxd

After several revisions, the submission was rejected by the Associate Editor without being sent for review, which is quite surprising.

(0) 讚！ | jxli2022

The final decision date for Immediate Reject is wrong, it has been corrected here to 2026.01.15.

(0) 讚！ | jxli2022

Associate Editor's Summary
This submission has a high overlap rate with existing work, and similar submissions with minor parameter changes should not be submitted due to lack of novelty. It is unfortunate that after several rounds of revisions, the submission was ultimately rejected. Authors are advised to be cautious when submitting their work.

(0) 讚！ | jxli2022