2020.01.12 Submitted, then it was with editor for about 15 days; 2020.01.29 under review; 2020.05.05 The first review result returned; 2020.06.06 revised submission after the first review; 2020.06.20 with editor; 2020.09.06 under review; 2020.09.15 The second review result returned; 2020.10.05 revised submission after the second review; 2020.11.06 Accepted. There were 3 reviewers, and they were very responsible and serious. It is still a very responsible journal.

(7) Thank | 天山雪豹

The speed was relatively fast. The editor was relatively responsible, and the comments were returned within one or two days. There is one problem of this journal, that is, there seem to be many reviewers. I had 6 reviewers. During the period, there were under review, under editor evaluation or required review completed. During the period, if the time changes, it actually means the review comments are returned. According to my guess, there should be three review comments from under review status to under editor evaluation, and there should be two review comments from under review status to required review completed for the second review, for reference only. Share the timeline: 2020.4.13, submitted; 2020.7.30, first review result was returned: major revision; 2020.8.28; submission of the revised manuscript according to the comments of the first review; 2020.10.26, accepted.

(12) Thank | XealJun

I submitted an article on rough set, and the process is as follows: March 2018 submission; August 2018 first review comments was received, major revisions were required, 1.5 months for revision were given. 4 reviewers, up to 40 large or small comments, requiring a large number of additional experiments. During the period, we applied to the editor to increase the modification time. The editor was very good and agreed our request. The revision after the first review was submitted on October 25, 2018. The second review comments were received on March 25, 2019 (I waited a long time before and sent an email to urge the editor), requiring a minor revision. The revised version was submitted on April 15, 2019. Comments were received from the third review. A reviewer questioned one of the formulas and we responded earnestly. It was accepted on June 4, 2019. The requirements in the journal are very strict, and the reviewers’ opinions are very pertinent. It is a good journal in the direction of artificial intelligence.

(100) Thank | graceful snow

This journal has a relatively slow review period and the submission requirements are extremely strict. If your article is sent out for review, the reviewer’s comments are usually fair yet rigorous, and always professional. The reviewers suggested that we complete additional simulations prior to resubmission for a recent paper we submitted. After completing the new simulations and revising the article, our manuscript was immediately accepted. Based on my experience, I think that the probability of acceptance is much higher if you complete all revisions suggested by the peer reviewers.

(8) Thank | xuxiajnz@163.com

Is there any recent revision? How long has the status "with Editor" in quotation marks been lasting?

(0) Thank | Bohua Li

Could you please confirm if all authors need to confirm this publication, as the editor has sent an email to all co-authors for confirmation?

(0) Thank | Fun_y

6555 is also WE.

(0) Thank | Xuke Zhong

I submitted an article at the end of June, with the reference number 6400+, and so far it is still in the waiting/editing (WE) stage, which is a bit slow.

(0) Thank | 林庭筠

Are you two reviewers?

(0) Thank | wwwwwwwww.

Hello, OP. Do all authors need to confirm the email for this journal? If an author's email address is incorrect, will the submission still be reviewed?

(0) Thank | 木子Fairy\

OP, may I ask if this journal requires all authors to confirm their emails? If an author's email address is incorrect, will the manuscript still be sent for review?

(0) Thank | 木子Fairy\

It's too slow, and the revised draft has added too much content, turning it into fifty pages.

(0) Thank | qaaa

Cross-directional computer environment. Environmental special issue. July 21st.

(0) Thank | Fun_y

May I ask who is the editor handling your article?

(0) Thank | 微笑面对

This journal is really slow. Here is the submission log:
- 2024/06/30 Submitted paper
- 2024/07/14 Format issue, resubmitted
- 2024/08/20 Invited 7 reviewers, 1 accepted
- 2024/10/11 Invited 12 reviewers, 2 accepted
- 2024/11/15 Major revision, first reviewer rejected, second reviewer requested minor revision, thanks to the editor for giving more time
- 2025/02/27 Major revision, first reviewer rejected, second reviewer accepted, thanks to the editor for giving more time
- 2025/06/13 Minor revision, first reviewer agreed to accept, second reviewer accepted
- 2025/07/19 Accept.
The entire submission process lasted for a year, with a poor experience. Although the paper was accepted, it was completely changed, long and tedious, purely to please the first reviewer. The issues raised such as: how to understand matrix multiplication and addition. Graduating classmates are needed for peer review. This submission was completely the editor giving chances and more time, thanks to the editor! Bowing to you!

(0) Thank | ParisPatron

Please translate the following paragraph into English: 对

(0) Thank | hahalwiiqqqq

Hello, does the first review must have the opinions of all three reviewers before returning for revisions?

(0) Thank | 小匡

2024.09.28 Submission
2024.10.09 Resubmission after format revision
2025.11.6 Managing Editor
2025.1.30 Associate Editor
2025.4.7 Major revision
2025.6.16 Returned (given two months, delayed due to revising another article, requested extension)
2025.7.4 Accepted with minor revision
2025.7.16 Accepted

(0) Thank | kopew

The first review required 3 reviewers, 2 of them completed the review, the third one disappeared. Then I sent several emails urging them to send me their opinions. In the second review, it was supposed to be 7-5-3, but the result turned into rrc. After more than a week passed without entering the DIP, I followed up again, only to find out that it had reverted back to UR. I am truly frustrated with this journal. I don't know why, and they didn't even send me an email explaining the reason.

(0) Thank | hahalwiiqqqq

Which magazine did you submit to?

(0) Thank | Leo

7.11 Revised
7.15 UR 1-0-0

(0) Thank | 科研-婷婷

He is the editor-in-chief.

(0) Thank | ZSCc1

The worst time taking journal I have ever seen. It is taking more than one year to publish your manuscript.

(0) Thank | Nilesh.iiitg@gmail.com

The worst time taking journal I have ever seen. It is taking more than one year to publish your manuscript.

(0) Thank | Nilesh.iiitg@gmail.com

A bit out of line, the second review actually re-invited 59 reviewers, which is overwhelming.

(2) Thank | Aa