I want to give some comments on the first post. Your logic is very problematic. Each discipline has its own value, and the main purpose is different. You must detour the Antarctic when you go to Beijing, right? I guess you will. Because you are mentally ill. I just say it politely.

(17) Thank | 夺日云天

Manuscript received, 20th Jul 2020; Manuscript under consideration, 24th Aug 2020; Revision received, 3rd Oct 2020; Revised manuscript received, 4th Oct 2020; Manuscript under consideration, 8th Oct 2020; Accepted, 28th Oct 2020. The manuscript was submitted at the end of July, and the review comments were received at the end of August. There were 2 reviewers, who raised nearly 20 comments, which were very professional. At first glance, he is an expert; the questions raised hit the nail on the head, which greatly improved the level of the article. The revised manuscript was submitted in one month and a half, and it was accepted in 3 weeks. The quality of this journal is high, and it has high requirements for theoretical knowledge in mathematics, physics and other subjects. In the long run, the impact factor should increase.

(26) Thank | 薛定谔的谔

It was submitted in November last year. I wrote a reminder letter in February this year, and received the review comments in March. They are all very pertinent and professional, and we revised back and forth twice before it was accepted in July. I feel that the quality of this journal is not bad, and it is very friendly to Chinese people, but the journal's popularity needs to be improved.

(5) Thank | 疏木51

Two external reviewers have received the manuscript for review. One returned feedback in 10 days, while the other has been taking 40 days. How do editors typically handle this situation? Also, how long does it usually take for reviewers to complete their reviews? Isn't it usually within a month? How long does the review process take for NPJ journals? Does anyone know?

(0) Thank | 好运加持

This journal is very likely to become a garbage journal in the future. There are several main reasons for this:

1. The processing speed is extremely slow and very biased. Big shots can get their papers done in 1-2 months, while regular people may have to wait up to a year just to get rejected.
2. Some editors prefer to have their friends review papers, leading to malicious rejections. Since it is a small-field journal, editors may have conflicts of interest, resulting in unethical practices such as dragging out the review process for months before ultimately rejecting the paper.
3. For some garbage articles submitted by big shots, such as machine learning with only 10 data points, all reviewers may recommend rejection. However, certain editors may still insist on revisions.
4. Despite the slow processing speed and inconsistent article quality, the publication fee is unreasonably high. Any domestic journal could easily outperform this one.
5. If the team does not make necessary changes to eliminate some editors who are unprofessional and biased, the journal may end up like Nano Letters. Nano Letters used to be one of the flagship journals in the field of chemistry and materials, with many big names contributing. However, due to biased editing practices and favoritism within the community, it has now fallen to a second-rate journal.

(3) Thank | jefu

What should I do if I accidentally agree to preprint submission? Can it be revoked?

(0) Thank | wang727

It seems like your timeline feels like something big is not right, and now I am:
Jan 25th 24, Manuscript Received
Jan 25th 24, Editor Assigned
Jan 28th 24, Manuscript Under Consideration
Received an email a few days later notifying that it was sent for external review, and "zip of files for reviewer" appeared in the manuscript items column, then:
Mar 6th 24, space
Mar 6th 24, Manuscript Under Consideration
Mar 8th 24, Waiting to Send Decision to Author
The "zip of files for reviewer" disappeared from the manuscript items column
Oh no! Please don't reject it, after waiting for a month and a half, please give me a chance to make revisions

(1) Thank | Asherly_Z

12.22 manuscript received/editor assigned
12.26 manuscript under consideration
2.5 Blank
2.22 manuscript under consideration
2.24 waiting to send decision to author
2.28 reject
Notification of rejection received after more than two months, overall slow with emails sent for review around mid-January

(1) Thank | Johnny_zxy

I also submitted it that way, assuming the first author for correspondence, but I don't think it's a problem. The author order is indicated in the Manuscript file, and if it is accepted, the proofreading process will also provide final confirmation

(0) Thank | Asherly_Z

This can be considered as a top journal in computational materials science, but compared to Nature Communications, it is definitely a notch higher

(0) Thank | NuMat

I would like to ask, if this journal accepts it, is it likely that the professor will be willing to pay the handling fee? Also, how reputable is this journal compared to Nature Communications? Which one would be better to submit to in the field of computational materials science? Thank you

(6) Thank | Carl_Ica

After waiting for two months, I received an email notification that the manuscript was being sent for review. However, the status remained unchanged after the review, still stating "manuscript under consideration." It seems that there are possibly too many submissions for this magazine, resulting in a particularly slow processing of manuscripts.

(0) Thank | raolixiang

May I ask if "under consideration" means it has been submitted for review or not yet? What does the status display after it has been submitted for review?

(0) Thank | Exciter

The submission has been 56 days already, and the current status is still "Manuscript Under Consideration". I am anxiously waiting.

(1) Thank | raolixiang

Disgusting rejection, I really can't believe it, garbage.

(0) Thank | Mrwenwen

May I ask if this journal requires a page charge?

(0) Thank | superman123

Indeed, submitting a contribution should be done carefully.

(0) Thank | Dr.H

It takes one month for the submission to be edited, but it is directly rejected without review. The replies are all generic responses unrelated to the content of the article. Submission should be done cautiously.

(0) Thank | Dr.H

May I ask what the status has become?

(0) Thank | Mamba1234

Can I ask if npj Computational Materials displays the status or sends an email to the corresponding author for review? Currently, it has been one month since submission and it is still under consideration.

(0) Thank | Mamba1234

Why is the default communication the first author and cannot be changed? Will there be any impact?

(0) Thank | asdf1

I would like to ask you, is the 1st author of the npj computational materials correspondent the first author?

(0) Thank | 小杉子

In the hands of the editor for one month
Reviewed for one month
Minor revisions: replied for one month
In total, it took three and a half months. The journal has a good quality (considered as a Nature sub-journal, with high requirements and a significant amount of calculations, also requiring innovation. If not in a hurry, you can give it a try).

(32) Thank | 壮壮~

Changed status, waited for a month at that time.

(0) Thank | 壮壮~

Excuse me, has your status changed now?

(1) Thank | 市民7