Finally finished. Here is my submission process. 31-May-2020 First submission (three reviewers); 13-Jun-2020 First review comments were received, 2 reviewers recommending acceptance, 1 recommending Re-review after a similar revision. The comments were of two full pages. 08-Jul-2020 it was modified for more than 20 days. Second submission, 16-Jul-2020. The reviewer made no comments and recommended acceptance, and the editor recommended acceptance. The reviews on the journal are mixed. The journals in Q1 are all inflated, they are all touted among the authorities, and the acquaintances review each other, so look at the journal rationally. I personally think that the journal is at the level of Q2. 3 journals, which is better than Q3. There are two main sources of grievances: 1. The papers published here by the fellow apprentices had an impact on him and he came to smear. 2. His own paper got rejected and he came here to smear the journal. There was also some pressure from competitors, and every journal would be smeared. So everyone should be sane. Regarding the fund, if there is only one IEEE Access paper, you should reflect on your academic ability and then consider applying for the fund. The fund will not reject your fund because of the IEEE Access paper, but a lack of high-level papers. Don’t believe authorities said how they reviewed the funds. Don’t believe the students’ talk about the teachers. First, the professors will not come here to post this. Second, if they operate in a dark box, they won’t tell the students. Look at the comments in the comment area rationally. You only need to be at ease and do your research, and write your own manuscripts seriously. Finally, I hope that all the comrades who have seen this review publish the papers.

(51) Thank | zwj374368

2. The article must be original writing that enhances the existing body of knowledge in the given subject area. However, review articles and surveys are acceptable if they add value, even if new data/concepts are not presented. 3. Applied research articles are acceptable if they are useful to the engineering community on how to demonstrate a technology that may not be novel. 4. The references that are provided must be applicable and sufficient. 5. The title is applicable and appropriate.

(2) Thank | hard

There was a classmate came to my public account and told me that someone was arguing for my article shared. [Laugh and cry]. Let me say a few words. @869 honestly and seriously move the bricks: Thank you for your positive voice for IEEE Access, and thank you for taking up the cudgels for the injured party. Your viewpoints on world, value and life are very positive. If you see my message someday, please add my Wechat: llkinchina. I hope to make friends with you. @870 dingwei: I really had a gap year, and I suspended my schooling and started a business, but you got the time wrong. After I returned to school in February 18, it took a year and a half to complete the thesis. It was submitted in October 2019. Would you like to say: How can it took a year and a half to finish the thesis and submitted to such a valueless journal? You are really a novice in research. It doesn’t matter, I always call myself novice, and it is just adding a prefix. I see you usually post some negative context, which will not affect IEEE Access at all, and will not waver those who want to submit to IEEE Access at all. Please spend more time to do things that are truly meaningful, even with your family, watching TV series. What’s more, I compiled some data packages. Follow the "kurryluo" official account, and respond to "access" (lowercase) to get it. For detailed sharing, please read this article: https://blog.csdn.net/kurry_/article/details/105072565

(18) Thank | kurryluo

Major in power electronics, combined with a little power system. I have submitted an article as a first author, three articles as corresponding authors, two articles as second authors to this journal, and I also reviewed several manuscripts. Views on this journal are constantly changing, and now it may be possible to make a relatively objective evaluation. In general, I think it can be divided into the following points. 1. Reviewers are very strict. Most of the reviewers I met basically review according to the benchmark of transactions. After all, it is an IEEE journal. When associate editors invite a reviewer and the reviewer evaluate a manuscript, they basically follow the general IEEE standards. 2. Associate editors are quite loose. Although the decision letter states that there is only one resubmission opportunity, under normal circumstances, as long as it is not really badly written, there are many opportunities. For many transactions journals, if there are a lot of concerns in the second review, they will be rejected by associate editors even if no reviewers directly give a rejection. Access is basically tolerant in this respect. 3. Low requirements for innovation is clearly written on the review invitation letter, and it is also the biggest difference with transactions. Basically, the manuscript will be rejected if there are only two or more reviewers who say that novelty is not basic enough. Even if you are not innovative enough in Access, it is acceptable to be able to solve new practical problems.

(21) Thank | 车芸

Let's briefly review the process: It was submitted on May 9. The decisions were made on July 12. There were 4 reviewers, three of them accepted it, and the other one rejected it. It was resubmitted, and the editor advised to resubmit after revision. The one who rejected the manuscript wrote more than 1000 words of comments, which was very detailed and helpful to the revision of the manuscript. I procrastinated for a month, including asking an American polishing company to improve my English editing after revision, which cost more than 300 dollars. The revision was submitted on August 18, and it was under review in 2 days. The decision was received on August 30, it was accepted with minor revision required. The revision was finished on the same day, and it was finally submitted. There were 2 reviewers in the second review, both of them accepted it. One of them made a lot of suggestions, most of which were about the support of references, and supplementing references was required. But the editor emphasized that the references must never be modified, even if there were suggestions from the reviewer. Ha-ha, it saved a lot of effort. Overall impression: The first review cycle was a bit long, it may be that my (research) direction was a bit unpopular, and it wasn’t easy to find enough reviewers. The article was in the hands of the president of the University of Iceland during the first review, and I was really worried about being rejected. The article itself had enough content, which mainly about domestic higher education, but I feared that the foreign reviewers did not understand the domestic environment. The overall speed is not slow, but it is a bit expensive, it may cost 1,700 dollars.

(6) Thank | Champion8819

I humbly ask you, my friends. I’m just an ordinary person. I just want to graduate. The paper is about image processing. First submission: 38 days after reviewing, it was rejected and resubmitted. 2 reviewers, a total of 12 comments. Second submission: revision for 33 days, and it was resubmitted. The reply letter exceeded 17 pages, and we tried our best to revise it. The reviewing lasted 25 days, and it was rejected and resubmitted again. There was a total of 3 reviewers in this round, with another reviewer added. The first reviewer said the similarity of the paper (25%) was too high; the second reviewer had no comments; the newly added reviewer had proposed 9 comments. The third submission: I revised it for 6 months. (My child had a pneumonia during the period and needed to be taken care of. I was an on-the-job student and needed to complete the teaching work in my affiliation.) Then it was re-submitted, with reply letter exceeding 17 pages. I checked the plagiarism on Taobao, and the similarity was 8%. I asked the teacher, checked a lot of information, and did my best. I was the only one in this direction and there was no experience in the laboratory. It was miserable and I had to wait. After 36 days of reviewing the manuscript, another reviewer was added. Oh, my God, I was going crazy. There were 4 reviewers in total. The first reviewer did not comment and the third reviewer did not reply. The fourth reviewer agreed to accept it, but also raised 5 revision opinions. The editor agreed to accept with modification. My question is: will the editor send my revised paper to the fourth reviewer? If the reviewer doesn’t approve my revision, will the editor reject the manuscript? I’m on-the-job, it’s so suffering, and I don’t have time to take care of the children. My wife keeps bothering. Is there anyone who had experience can tell me? Thank you!

(21) Thank | adfas23

2017.11.3 submitted, 11.22 assigned associate editor, 12.18 received Decision, rejection and re-submit. Four reviewers, the first three suggested re-submission after revision, and the last reviewer suggested rejection. Revised the paper according to the comments (major revision, the third reviewer asked to redesign the experiment), and wrote the Cover Letter and Response Letter. 12.27 re-submitted, 2018.1.15 assigned associate editor, and 1.22 received the acceptance notice. Afterwards submitted the final draft and paid the fee on Jan. 25, published by Early Access on Jan. 29. Based on these two submission experiences, overall the cycle is stable except for the step of assigning the associate editor, which was slow. I feel that overall it not difficult to publish in Access, although the impact factor is very high. However, the journal is not highly recognized in the field (very few papers from Access have made great contributions to the field, and people don’t cite papers from Access). Therefore, if you are interested in doing long-term scientific research, aim at the top journals.

(37) Thank | wyq_em@163.com

请提供更多上下文信息。这段话看起来是一个单词的重复，没有明确的含义。

(0) Thank | lucky_bingbing

How do I withdraw my submission?

(0) Thank | 郭郭郭11

How can we tell if the original reviewer is still the same? We can't see the reviewer on the webpage, only the EIC and ADM have changed.

(0) Thank | lucky_bingbing

The paper was submitted at the end of October 2024, and the first round of comments was not received until January 2025. There were two reviewers, with Reviewer 1 asking 7 detailed questions and Reviewer 2 asking 3 simpler questions (such as adding references, adjusting formatting, and including an additional experiment). After revisions were made in February, the paper was resubmitted, only to be rejected in April. However, the first reviewer in the rejection letter expressed acceptance of the paper, while the second reviewer inexplicably provided four additional suggestions. It is frustrating that issues were not addressed in the initial review, causing a delay of nearly six months. It is truly exhausting.

(0) Thank | 三月橙

I sent an email to ADM the day before yesterday, and they replied to me the next day.

(0) Thank | huang bob

Submitted: 2025-03-05
Best video BV: 2025-03-16
still waiting for review. (2025-04-02)

(0) Thank | ka1995

How come ADM hasn't replied? They used to reply on the same day, but this time it's been two days and still no response, and their status hasn't changed either.

(0) Thank | 米糖咖啡

Submitted before the New Year, it was reviewed for two months, and two reviewers provided feedback. The issues were not significant, so I made positive revisions within a week and resubmitted. However, after waiting for over a month, the result was meaningless and they advised against resubmitting. It was a waste of time and energy. It's really disappointing, I will switch to a different journal.

(0) Thank | 晨起一杯茶

Does it matter which district we are in if we have already gained access?

(0) Thank | haiquanL

I would like to ask if I have also been directly accepted as a first reviewer, and then a reviewer gave me some suggestions. Do I need to write a response letter to the suggestions when submitting the final manuscript?

(0) Thank | xiaoxiang sun

The manuscript has been withdrawn.

(0) Thank | xxxlu

Oh my god, I woke up and found myself in District Four... I want to withdraw my submission now.

(3) Thank | 狠狠嗑盐

It's been changed to the fourth district and it's still so slow. It takes two and a half months to receive the first review after submitting the manuscript. It will probably take another two months for the external review and revision. The reviewing experts are different each time, it's too slow, too slow.

(2) Thank | ds

It has already changed to Zone 4, so I don't recommend investing anymore. It may be difficult to break through.

(2) Thank | break_siege

Yes, haha.

(0) Thank | 金典喵

Has it been reduced to four districts?

(2) Thank | #00FFFF

So slow.

(0) Thank | hh_qaq

I will return on March 18th, so it would be great if you can receive it before April 3rd.

(0) Thank | huang bob