The manuscript was refused without being sent for review. 2019.12.31: Submit and pending review; 2020.1.3: Reject. “We are writing to inform you that we will not be able to process your submission further. Submissions sent for peer-review are selected on the basis of discipline, novelty and general significance, in addition to the usual criteria for publication in scholarly journals. Therefore, our decision is not necessarily a reflection of the quality of your work. We wish you every success if you choose to submit it elsewhere.” Friends, do you have same experience?

(4) Thank | averyliu7854

“We are writing to inform you that we will not be able to process your paper further. Papers sent for peer-review are selected on the basis of discipline, novelty and general significance, in addition to the usual criteria for publication in scholarly journals. Therefore, our decision is not necessarily a reflection of the quality of your research. We wish you every success if you choose to submit the paper elsewhere.” I had published one before, but the one now was rejected in a second.

(6) Thank | YYY_XXX

It’s difficult to get published on this journal for the large number of submissions and the focus on innovation. The editor was strict, only the innovative articles will be sent for review. The review rate is 20%. The first submission was rejected in seconds and the second one added content to highlight the innovative points, but it was rejected too in seconds for the reason of not novel enough. The third submission was made full improvement for the experiment after two rejected experiences, and finally was sent for review. Submitted on April 19, 2019, and major revision required after ten days on May 1, 2019. All the three reviewers found my article was interesting. The first reviewer, a remote sensing expert, was very careful and sharply pointed out 27 questions in the article; The second reviewer, a peer, praised my article for good writing and structure with innovative ideas, and he also proposed the adjustment of section order and up to 22 comments; The third reviewer, an expert peer, although he thought the innovation was acceptable, he spoke fiercely and pointed out 5 questions, the last question was difficult to solve, but it’s related to the topic of the article. Revision returned on May 11, 2019 and minor revision was made on May 17, 2019. The academic editor felt that the first reviewer really did not understand the article, so the article was only sent to the second and third reviewers in the second review. The second reviewer was satisfied and agreed to accept it and the third reviewer was basically satisfied with a minor revision required. The revised submission for minor revision was on the same day. The editing process was very fast, and it just took 20 minutes to be waiting for the editor’s decision. It was officially accepted on May 19, 2019. It’s up to the academic editor or editor-in-chief decides whether to accept or not, which took 2 days. It is better to have the good command of English for the article. Although it’s an open access journal, the quality of journal articles was of good quality and the review was rigorous.

(9) Thank | 爱笑的小飞鱼

Submitted-Sept. 26, Rejected-Sept. 27. The format was wrong, so we corrected the format and submitted again. Resubmitted-Sept. 28, Major revision-Nov. 24, Accepted-Nov. 30. My paper is on hyperspectral remote sensing classification. First I wanted to submit to the TGRS, but since I wanted to apply to a foreign graduate program, and this journal is known to be fast, I submitted here. At the beginning, there were two reviewers. One reviewer was very positive about my paper, praised my article from various aspects, and then asked two minor questions at the end. Although the other reviewer was also positive about my article, they obviously didn't understand it and only asked a few questions. The editor-in-chief then found another reviewer, who must be an expert. I was asked me to use various statistical methods to verify the proposed method and other methods. I haven't even heard of a lot of the techincal terms used in the comments. I have read hundreds of articles in hyperspectral classification but I have never seen anyone using these many statistical methods. I revised the paper following each of the review comments, and my neck hurt for several days afterwards. Finally accepted. From this submission experience, I feel the quality of this journal is slowly rising. Of course, still not as good as TGRS.

(1) Thank | GDUT

Submission received: 29 March 2025 / Revised: 5 May 2025 / Accepted: 11 May 2025 / Published: 14 May 2025

(2) Thank | 1614895088@qq.com

Submitted on March 24th, first revision 10 days later, second revision 5 days later, accepted on May 10th.

(0) Thank | lyb0707

Update on 5.9: rejected by editor, it was difficult to endure the wait for 10 days just to receive a rejection.

(0) Thank | 不互动不会玩

After sending the message yesterday, I received it around 9 p.m.

(0) Thank | wwwsanw

Submitted at the end of February, UR has been experiencing for about a month. After resubmission, it has been in the status of waiting for academic editing in PED for about a month. I don't know if it's graduation season or for some other reason that has caused the progress of the manuscript to be very slow. Hope to be accepted soon.

(0) Thank | wwwsanw

May I ask what field you have invested in?

(0) Thank | qc7

5.6 Update status: pending editor decision, probably because the editor has returned from vacation and is now preparing to reject my submission.

(0) Thank | 不互动不会玩

Hello, I just submitted my paper a couple of days ago. Although the system status is "under review," the editor decision column tells me that it does not fit within the scope of the journal. What should I do in this situation? Do I need to wait for the status to change to "reject"?

(0) Thank | 不互动不会玩

Hello, I wanted to ask about the status of my article in RS. The editor just reviewed it yesterday and the next day the editor decision told me it does not fit within the scope of the journal. However, the status in the submission system still shows as "under review". What is going on with this situation? Will it remain "under review" for a long time? When will it show as "rejected" so that I can easily submit to another journal?

(0) Thank | 不互动不会玩

RS is really fast, submitted on 4.30, under review on 5.1, and informed on 5.2 that it does not meet the scope of the journal. However, one thing I don't quite understand is that it was already indicated in the editor's decision section that it does not meet the scope. Why does the review status still show as under review? Shouldn't it be rejected directly?

(0) Thank | 不互动不会玩

How long do you wait for a review?
I submitted an article one week ago. Now status is „pending review”. When my article will be under review?

(0) Thank | Mdpimistrz

4-7 待审核

4-7 Pending review.

(0) Thank | fhhgo

Excuse me, which direction is artificial intelligence heading in?

(0) Thank | 65

What aspect of artificial intelligence are you referring to?

(0) Thank | 65

Hello, may I ask how long you have been waiting in this status?

(0) Thank | wwwsanw

The manuscript has been reviewed by RS 16 times, with 7 rejections. There were 12 acceptances and 11 rejections. Taking into account some desk rejections, the overall acceptance rate is estimated to be around 40%.

(0) Thank | 随机生成#

How is it going? Has the assistant editor been assigned?

(0) Thank | wxybtq

2025.3.24 Pending review.

(0) Thank | 7564

Why does it take two months for a major overhaul? Wasn't it said that the first review would be done in just over 20 days?

(0) Thank | s1mpleo

Has the brother produced results?

(0) Thank | s1mpleo

My mistake, the classification for 25 years is still slightly different. 25 years have been categorized as follows: major category: Earth Science Zone 2; subcategories: Imaging Science Zone 2, Environmental Science Zone 3, Earth Science Comprehensive Zone 3, Remote Sensing Zone 3.

(1) Thank | 学术版九节狼