It is absurd to regard it as unqualified! There are three reasons: 1. There are too many articles published in SR, for 40,000 articles per year (?) This is a comprehensive journal involving earth, science, mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, environment, humanities, engineering, technology, agriculture, forestry, management fields, etc. If each field has 9 directions, there will be about 100 professional fields. If 40,000 papers are spread in these fields, there will be only 400 papers in each field, which is equivalent to the annual circulation of an ordinary professional journal. Is it too much? Not at all! This is just a new model of displaying the knowledge and information cluster with the improvement of big data processing (retrieval) capabilities in the information technology era. You are only confused by the new things, and provide inappropriate information that curses people, which is annoying and pitiful. 2. Some valueless papers were published, which is not a reason to regard that a certain journal is unqualified. Is there any journal has no valueless papers? Some top journals also have some valueless papers, otherwise the Han SY incident would not happen, and the Nobel Prize would still be sent to the wrong person. Having a high rate of valueless papers is the reason why xx journal is an unqualified journal. But it is definitely not the same for SR. Just look at its impact factor of 4.1 (Q1), and you can't say that the rate of valueless papers is high. At least it is lower than other 75% journals. 3. That’s just sour grapes. This is the real reason. Anyone who can publish one article here will not despise it, otherwise why do you want to submit to SR, are you a fool?

(552) Thank | °C007

September 4, the review invitation was received; September 7, I found it was treated as a spam, so I resumed it and found that I was required to finish the review in 10 days, that was, I should return the review comments on September 14. I didn't receive any comments from the editor after rejection. However, I saw my name in the updated reviewer list today. The request for review is a manuscript from a top medical school in a foreign country (the name, institution and contact information of the first author were retained in the manuscript, and I felt it was somewhat non-compliant). The article is about the combination of machine learning and cancer screening. It is estimated that the editor had seen the article of mine in similar directions published on the internet, and found me. I was not contacted before. This article can be said to be completely non-innovative. Using the model in sklearn, running the program in the cancer database, and adjusting the parameters. There are a lot of similar articles. The workload cannot be said to be absent, but the whole is hard work, at least in the direction of machine learning, there is no contribution. If there is a revision, then the entire article should be restarted from the beginning, and it is no different from rejection. Therefore, it makes sense to say that this journal is valueless. However, it is not the kind of journal that can your articles accepted by paying. At least you can easily make your articles accepted by the journals in Q1 and Q2, then you can say this journal is valueless. The most incomprehensible thing was that the article was sent to me before confirming if I can be the reviewer. What if I leaked it? This was not very responsible.

(41) Thank | Derek

I personally think this is a very good journal, especially I can get the opportunity of guidance and continuous attention from experts! A total of four reviewers (One of them insisted on rejection without providing detailed comments, but with few sentences saying that it did not solve any problems and was not suitable for publication in any journal. The other three reviewers had very positive comments. However, the reviewers were very serious and gave a lot of suggestions for revisions), and all the reviewers are academic experts who have posted a large number of articles in top journal (Such as Nature, Science, NC, NG, Geology, ESR, EPSL, etc.). From submission to publication, it went through from first rejection, second major revision, and the third minor revision to acceptance. I have benefited a lot from this submission, and it will be a treasure of my life! The second manuscript has been submitted for more than a month. Currently the new submission system does not support tracking the specific process. I hope I can receive good news after the new year~ PS: You will know it is a good journal or not after you submitting it. And I don’t think it is necessary to argue too much. At least SR is a better option to be submitted to after the rejection by NC and NG. It’s not terrible being rejected by the top journal. Stick to it! The rest of your life is very long, and there is always a chance to be accepted once~

(37) Thank | Marvin

It took more than 50 days to be assigned to the editor and I urged 2 times during the period. Is it possible to be rejected in this status now? Stage: Start Date, End Date, Approximate Duration. Decision Started 14th May 19; Manuscript assigned to peer-reviewer/s 14th May 19; Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 30th April 19; Manuscript Assigned to Editor 24th April 19; Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 23rd April 19; Manuscript Assigned to Editor 19th April 19; Manuscript Submitted 25th February 19; Quality Check Started 22nd February 19.

(8) Thank | 遥花姬

Let me add that this journal and PLOS ONE are being considered for blacklisting by the National Fund Committee. It comes from Nature’s official news: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07025-5...that researchers cannot use grant money to pay their publication fees....The first list contains two of the world's largest journals PLOS ONE and Scientific Reports. Joerg Heber, Editor-in-Chief of PLOS ONE. You should think twice before considering submitting articles to this journal.

(41) Thank | xzw1995

I feel the journal requires a certain quality of the paper. Because my paper was on a real novel idea, it was not easy to find a reviewer. There was only one reviewer and the comments were mostly about details or asking for clarification, so it was minor revision. Took me 2 days to resubmit to the editor, and the editor sent it to the reviewer (I feel this is unnecessary). Then the reviewer returned only one sentence saying that the author had completely revised the article in accordance with the comments. Then the paper was accepted. Because I had formatted the paper corrected, there was no need to change the format, and I didn’t get questions regarding the language. In fact, the reviewer said that the language was good. Decision Started 1 July 2016, Manuscript assigned to peer-reviewer/s 1 July 2016, Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 9 June 2016, Manuscript Assigned to Editor 18 May 2016, Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 30 March 2016, Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 23 March 2016, Manuscript Submitted 30 January 2016.

(9) Thank | 章鱼丸子

I feel that it's okay to push for a quick edit before finalizing. It's the assistant editor who should be pushed. However, after handing it over to the responsible editor, caution is required, but of course, it may be necessary to remind them even if it takes a long time.

(0) Thank | 脑电+AI

I have been stuck with the editor for half a month now, should I follow up with them?

(0) Thank | 35.7

You are indeed too slow. It's been three months and you still haven't sent it out. You should hurry up.

(0) Thank | 脑电+AI

Dude, the 11-day deadline we set for March 10th has passed and the small edits have been made. We exaggerated the data availability to "yes" and that's it. Still no news yet.

(0) Thank | 王叔叔的忧伤

Hello, I submitted my repair request on March 10th and it has been two weeks, but I haven't received any update yet. May I ask when did you receive the feedback for the repair?

(0) Thank | 王叔叔的忧伤

When reimbursing credit card expenses, it states on the card that receipts will be sent within 3-5 days. If the receipt is different from the invoice, can the receipt be reimbursed directly?

(0) Thank | YY

It's too slow. I submitted it on April 2nd, and there is only one reviewer now. It has been over 70 days and I have not received the first review result yet.

(0) Thank | 王璞

Technical review has been 14 days.

(0) Thank | zhengxx1016

Both the editors and reviewers were very efficient. The manuscript was submitted on April 18th and accepted on June 18th, exactly two months later. It was quicker than expected. Hopefully, it will be online before July.

(1) Thank | Stella

I received the payment notice three or four days after I accepted it, and then received the proofreading email about five days after I paid. Payment can be made through WeChat and Alipay, but it seems that a service fee will be charged.

(0) Thank | 小陈

Hello, may I ask how long it takes from receiving the acceptance notification to receiving the final draft email and payment information? It's been two days since I received the acceptance notification but haven't heard anything yet. Can I pay the fee directly with Alipay?

(0) Thank | bbusy

Submitted for four months before acceptance, two rounds of peer review, accepted after minor revisions suggested by the editor.

(0) Thank | 小陈

Hello, have the results of your article come back?

(0) Thank | 阿门alina

From October last year until now.

(0) Thank | Leohi

Just like you, I also recently received feedback from three reviewers, but the editor has not responded yet. I have already graduated.

(0) Thank | Leohi

Hello host, I am in the exact same situation as you right now. How can I resolve it?

(1) Thank | YY

I am too, my screenshot is exactly the same as yours, how should I handle it?

(0) Thank | YY

Hello, may I ask how long it takes from receiving the offer letter to sending the enrollment confirmation email and payment email?

(0) Thank | bbusy

It will take about 7-10 days.

(0) Thank | 阿门alina