2019.11.21, submission; 2020.01.10, notification of the first round of revision was received. Six reviewers, four required minor revisions, and two required major revisions. The revision was returned in six weeks. 2020.04.10, notification of the second round of revision was received. One minor revision and one major revision were required. 2020.05.07, The revision for the second round was returned. 2019.05.11, the editor did not send the manuscript for review and directly accepted it. The reviewers are very professional. There is a chance to be accepted if you revise the manuscript point to point according to the questions.

(7) Thank | 无边的少年

2019.07.30, R0 version submitted; 2019.09.28, First revision requirement; 2019.10.30, R1 version submitted; 2019.12.08, Second revision requirement; 2019.12.08, R2 version submitted; 2019.12.21, Accept without changes. The first article in Trans series in my life. As I was heart-wrenching for rejections, if I didn’t attend an IEEE PES conference before, I would not dare to submit to this journal at all. Later, I learned that attending the meeting was actually of no help... The first review opinions meant a lot of work, and the journal even sent reminders to return the revision. In the second review, the reviewer 2 was still dissatisfied, but did not provide specific comments, only saying that the article needed go further in-depth. The editor was still very professional and believed that the opinions of the reviewer 2 can be reflected in other articles in the future, and the content of this article was enough (it had already exceeded page limit). As for the opinions of other reviewers, one recommended direct acceptance, and the other had two small questions in figures that the editor said that it would be fine to explain in two sentences. After returning, I waited for about two weeks with great hope, and it was finally accepted. Thank the professional and nice editing teacher very much~ I am so happy!

(16) Thank | 青羽

3 months. 4 reviewers. I feel that the experts are rigorous and very careful. They should be familiar with the field. Also proposed a very good revision, paying attention to the innovation of the article.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Why is it so slow? Sigh.

(0) Thank | jiayouzsy

Asking is useless, these are all template replies. It's just slow these two years, a six-month wait for the first review is very normal.

(0) Thank | 3/2700

I recently followed up, but the editor replied that they checked the status of your paper and found that the review process is still ongoing. Typically, the review process can take up to 90 days, but in some cases, if more time is needed for review, it may exceed the 90-day limit. I don't have any further information at the moment, but if you wish, feel free to contact me again if you haven't received any updates in the next few weeks. Should I continue to wait, or should I inquire about the progress of the reviewers?

(0) Thank | jiayouzsy

I am already six months old, but I still haven't received the first review. Sigh...

(0) Thank | DQGC

Still no news. Sigh, it's been over four months.

(0) Thank | jiayouzsy

After with the editor, the manuscript was sent to reviewers, but they quickly rejected it, so the status changed to under review when I checked it. Overall, the peer review process was a bit slow and challenging. Here is a summary of the submission record:

- May 5, 2024: Submitted the paper
- December 5, 2024: Received reviewer comments from three experts, with over thirty comments, many of which were sharp.
- January 12, 2025: Submitted revised manuscript R1
- March 30, 2025: Received reviewer comments, with another expert providing seven to eight comments, all of which were more common knowledge.
- April 18, 2025: Submitted revised manuscript R2
- May 27, 2025: Accepted without changes.

(0) Thank | sunset6666

I don't quite understand, maybe it hasn't been updated?

(0) Thank | 3/2700

Yes, it went directly under review without any with review.

(0) Thank | sunset6666

Is there no reviewer with?

(0) Thank | 3/2700

Excuse me, brothers, my paper has been under review with the editor for about a month after the second revision. Now the status has changed to "under review." Can you tell me if it will be reviewed by the reviewers next? It has been over a year since I submitted the paper, and I am very anxious.

(0) Thank | sunset6666

The second article is even more outrageous. After waiting for a year and a half, I had already found a job, but the article still had not been accepted.

(0) Thank | 黄豆大盘鸡

18-Mar-2024 Submit
Passed initial screening a month later
19-Nov-2024 Revise and Resubmit
05-Dec-2024 Revised
08-Feb-2025 Accept Without Changes
The speed is surprisingly slow, greatly depending on the efficiency of the associate editor, while the editor-in-chief basically gives results within a day.

(0) Thank | 黄豆大盘鸡

The reviewer is taking longer to review your work. Please be patient and wait for a good result.

(0) Thank | heyhey

With more than 1800 cases, the first-instance opinions have not been returned yet, and we are still in a state of waiting with reviewers. What should we do? It's really urgent.

(0) Thank | DQGC

Thank you, so it turns out that I am not the corresponding author so I cannot check.

(0) Thank | Zunaki

The corresponding author will receive a reminder email, or they can log into the old system with their corresponding account, which will contain the necessary information.

(0) Thank | 黄豆大盘鸡

May I ask where can I find such detailed information on the review process? Thank you.

(0) Thank | Zunaki

04.07 submit
04.08 Reviewed by 1 person
04.14 Reviewed by 1 person
04.29 Reviewed by 1 person
05.03 EIC
05.04 accept

(0) Thank | heyhey

Submitted in December 24th, 1800 plus number.
Editing started on February 25th, 2009, the process was slow.
The first reviewer agreed to review on February 11th.
Reviewed on February 17th.
The second reviewer agreed to review on March 4th.
Reviewed on March 6th.
The third reviewer directly reviewed on March 14th (suspected to be the associate editor).
EIC on March 16th.
Major revisions on March 17th.

(0) Thank | heyhey

2025.04.14 Reject Three reviewers. The first one provided a neutral opinion, while the second and third reviewers included a lot of content unrelated to the paper's topic and did not ask any questions about the content of the article. I believe that the reviewers for TPD have a poor ability to accept new things.

(0) Thank | 电气艺术家

It has been 3 months and it is still under review.

(0) Thank | jiayouzsy

Has the OP got any new updates?

(0) Thank | DQGC