It has been around 9 months. I did urge the review for one time, but there was no result...

(0) Thank | 失落

The journal's impact factor is not high, but it is indeed a representative journal of multidimensional system theory. Professor N.K Bose (the late), the founder of the journal, is the originator of multidimensional systems theory. The speed of reviewing journals is still relatively fast, and the associate editor and reviewers are quite responsible. I have been lucky enough to have two of my articles accepted by the journal. I feel that this journal also has the advantage of not limiting the length of the paper. Many journals limit the length of the paper, making it difficult to submit. Its online submission system is very convenient. It is a very good choice for researchers in the field of multidimensional systems.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

8.10 resubmit stake group
8.13 under review 5-6-1//
8.15 under review 7-2-9//
8.16 under review 0-7-6//
8.29 accept..................

(0) Thank | kekeshijie

The editor is very interested in innovation and is eager to submit the manuscript as soon as possible, as the journal is stable and in line with the submission topics. It is just a matter of time before it gets published in Zone 3. The acceptance rate is relatively high, but the probability of a long wait for submission and slow processing is also high. Most likely, the article did not impress the editor.

(0) Thank | 行云流水

I would like to ask, how long does the first repair take?

(0) Thank | race

Review time is more than 12 months, students who are not in a hurry can consider, publish a basic one year

(0) Thank | 小药师

has been submitteding for 12 months, still no news,This journal is really too slow and too slow!

(0) Thank | ts

Very good journal, submitted 2 times, all in the middle, this article was originally rejected by Electronic letter, the opinion is very layman and rude(I don't know if there are such unreliable people in the academic circle.) I am too lazy to defend (toss a waste of time), I expanded it, selectd for it, and overhauled it after March. After 2 months of overhaul, I wrote a letter.Accept with minor edition. There is no layout fee and review fee, very standard publication

(1) Thank | Anonymous

This journal is still very good. The requirements for innovation and experiment are relatively high. First of all, there must be a prominent innovation point, and then a full range of experiments should be carried out to prove your algorithm.Feasibility, the questions raised by the reviewers of this journal are very sharp and well-placed. They can learn a lot of things. The review time is now a little longer, but it is very convenient after the recruitment. Only the website confirmation is required.Don't have to mess with copyrights and other things, and also contributePapers should take a look at the language issue, the journal was quite focused on the language ability of writing.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Submission to accept takes more than one year.Not suitable for acute sub-submitigators.The questions raised by the reviewers are in place and very sharp.EIC and AE are both responsible.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Last year's 11 submissions, accepted this year, 9 months, first trial around six months, directly accepted after the overhaul, is indeed a good journal in multi-dimensional image processing.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

The first trial is relatively fast, from the time of the trial to the end of the trial for more than 2 months, the result of overhaul, the revised submission was very slow after more than ten days to send a review, reviewed for more than 3 monthsDuring the period, I wanted to try the manuscript many times...Fortunately, the article still received

(1) Thank | Anonymous

I don't know if it is because I wrote a paper about the processing of multi-dimensional signal video, the review speed is very slow, from June 20th to submission, to 11The external audit was completed on the 8th of the month, and then was rejected on the 15th.It’s too time consuming, but the result is a cup!However, it is worth mentioning that there is a reviewer's opinion is very pertinent, saying that the article is new, but need to add content.The other reviewer directly said that he could not understand and felt very irresponsible!

(0) Thank | Anonymous