Same as on the 121st floor, two days after submission, the editor directly replied: "We are writing to inform you that we will not be able to process your submission further. Submissions sent for peer-review are selected on the basis of discipline, novelty and general significance, in addition to the usual criteria for publication in scholarly journals. Therefore, our decision is not necessarily a reflection of the quality of your work. We wish you every success if you choose to submit it elsewhere." It is the editorial office in Beijing. It is my first submission. The focus was not very clear and it was really not very good.

(0) Thank | perty

2019.12.31 Submitted; 2020.01.02 under review; 2020.01.22 major revision; 2020.01.31 revision submitted, and revised version review; 2020.02.10 major revision (The experiment was not supplemented during the first major revision, and the reviewer required us to supplement the experiment, and this time it was requested to make a major revision); 2020.02.14 Revised version review after the revised manuscript was submitted; 2020.02.18 pending editor decision; 2020.02.18 accepted; 2020.02.18 Notification of payment received. Click on the payment link and pay 1350 Swiss francs directly with visa or mastercard credit card (you can also see the UnionPay option. UnionPay should also be available). It is very convenient; 2020.02.20 final proofreading (completed within 24 hours); 2020.02.21 Submitted the final version; 2020.02.21 Published. Summary: The first time when I wrote a SCI paper in the second year of postgraduate, the teacher told me before submission that the editor of this journal has a high direct rejection rate. There is a 50% possibility that the editor will directly reject the manuscript immediately after submission, without sending it for external review. If the editor sends it for review, there is generally no problem, and the probability of being accepted is extremely high.

(16) Thank | shengchao99205

I submitted the article on May 17th, 2019. I received the decision of the first round of preview on June 17th. The opinions of four reviewers were mixed. The editor required a major revision and let me send back the revised manuscript in 10 days. I required for five more days for revision and the editor gave me ten more days. I returned the manuscript on July 3rd. I received the decision of the second round of review on August 25th. The reviewers have no comments. The academic editor asked me to make minor revisions in five days. I misunderstood the editor's meaning that he/she was dissatisfied with the minor revisions and required minor revisions again. He/she let me add comparisons between my product and references in five days. The revision was sent back on September 12th, accepted on September 17th and published online on September 22th. Since the article was submitted to a special issue of an international conference, it was early and the review was strict. I was anxious to graduate. I heard that the efficiency was very high and the review speed was very fast. Therefore, I submitted the article to this journal. However, my personal experience was rather bumpy. I summary that there were two main reasons: (1) Indeed, the article was not very innovative. (2) It was too early to submit to a special issue. Fortunately, I revised it carefully and the test data was completed. The article was expanded from 13 pages to 16 pages. Although it is an open access journal with publication fee of 1,500 francs, it is never easy to be accepted. The requirements for domestic doctoral graduation have increased year by year. The paper number submitting to the journal has also increased year by year. The cost has gradually increased. Articles submitted to MDPI are often rejected in seconds. My personal field is mechanical engineering that has strong technical applications. It is difficult to write innovate articles. I personally think that the journal is not poor and the reviewers are very professional. Students who are in urgent need of articles are advised to be cautious about their special issues. Perhaps the review process of normal issues could be faster and it only takes about a month. The submission system is relatively user-friendly, friendly in operation. The editor is friendly and very efficient in processing. Finally, thank the forum for let us to help each other!

(4) Thank | 吃鸡的炉宗弟子

OA journal, so the cost is high. However, I have no complaints on the editor office, which worked very fast. My paper is an in-depth study that extends from a previously published work. To be honest, the novelty is not as high as the previous work. However, the work demonstrated a very important point. Originally I wanted to submit to a more specialize journal, but this journal happened to be soliciting papers from my advisor, so I submitted here. I think if someone wants to be more established in the field, they should try submitting to a more specialized, Top Journal.

(4) Thank | Bin Zhuang

The latest progress is that we have successfully hired on 4.18. It's amazing!

(0) Thank | 灰木系舟

3.17 submit
3.18 pending review
3.19 under review
4.10 pending major revisions
Two reviewers, one yes, 8 can, one must, major revisions requested by the editor
4.16 resubmitted
4.17 revised version review
Still waiting, but hopefully soon

(1) Thank | 灰木系舟

03.18 Pending Review
03.18 Under Review
04.04 Pending Major Revisions
Two reviewers, nine comments
04.10 Resubmitted
04.10 Revised Version Review
04.11 Pending Editor Decision
04.11 Accept
04.12 Website Online

(0) Thank | NaClO

Received on April 1st, thank you for the journal.

(0) Thank | Imdahua

2.21 submission
3.13 two major revisions, one minor revision
3.24 revised
3.25 awaiting editorial decision (two reviewers for major revisions have agreed to accept, one reviewer for minor revision has not yet submitted comments)

The waiting is so painful, do we really have to wait for all three reviewers to submit their comments before the journal makes a decision? I see in the comments section that results are usually available in about 3 days.

(0) Thank | Imdahua

Could I ask which direction you are referring to? Are you interested in CV or NLP?

(0) Thank | 好运常来

How long does your first review take? Is it directly accepted? What direction are you working on? CV or NLP?

(0) Thank | 好运常来

Could I ask which direction are you referring to? Is it CV, NLP, or MM?

(0) Thank | 好运常来

May I ask if there are any new developments now?

(0) Thank | 好运常来

May I ask if it is in the field of CV or NLP? How long does the first review take?

(0) Thank | 好运常来

3.27 Maintenance

(0) Thank | qwdsaadw

Still in UR.

(0) Thank | zzz

Brother, I also applied with a 3.4 GPA and have been waiting for 20 days. What's your status?

(0) Thank | 发一篇csi

Submitted on 3.20
Rejected directly by the template on 3.23
Probably because there was no funding attached + I am the only graduate student author + the paper was written poorly.

(0) Thank | bjqndx

Hello, may I ask how things are going with the follow-up? It's been almost a week since I've been pending, and I'm wondering if a long pending time means it's not going to work out.

(0) Thank | bjqndx

Bro, any news?

(0) Thank | 中了毕业

Is this Word template compatible with any other journal templates?

(0) Thank | 钱钱钱

I have also been rejected.

(0) Thank | 学渣二狗

3.1 submitted, 3.7 rejected, submitted to an energy journal, the result of the blind review came back as a rejection, asking me to submit to this one, and it was also rejected for me.

(0) Thank | 学渣二狗

3.4 Submission
3.7 Rejected

(0) Thank | DrZhang

Please make a note of the submission.
2025.3.4 PR
2025.3.5 UR

(0) Thank | zzz