An article was just accepted. I will share something for your reference. I hope that all your manuscripts will be accepted. Four reviewers, 2 minor revision comments of the first review were simple. 2 minor revision comments of the second review were sharp. It took more than a month to revise and supplement the new comparison algorithm. All four reviewers recommended acceptance in the second review. 09-Oct-2019 Submitted to IEEE Cybernetics; 09-Oct-2019 Awaiting Administrator Processing; 15-Oct-2019 Under Review; 09-Jan-2020 With Associate Editor; 14-Jan-2020 Awaiting EIC Decision; 14-Jan-2020 Revision-Regular Paper; 06-Feb-2020 Under Review; 22-Mar-2020 With Associate Editor; 02-Apr-2020 Awaiting EIC Decision; 08-Apr-2020 Accept as Regular Paper; 13-Apr-2020 Copyright transferred.

(7) Thank | 小汤美10

Articles submitted in June 2018; Review comments received in July 2019, and it is a rejection. Let me talk about my personal feelings. I was submitting to this journal for the first time. The review was too slow and we encountered unprofessional reviewers... First, the reviewing speed is really too slow. It lasted for 13 months. Generally, the students in school can't afford to wait, but fortunately I have graduated. However, such a long review cycle will seriously affect the publication of the paper, because everyone knows that the direction of artificial intelligence is developing rapidly. Second, there were only two reviewers’ comments, and the first one accepted it with minor revisions required. The second one rejected it, and asked some strange questions. Then the editor directly rejected my article. Third, I just want to say something about the reviewer that rejected our article, who asked a lot of unprofessional questions, and obviously not experts in the field of artificial intelligence deep learning. For example, there are many inexplicable questions about the position of the BN layer in the experiment, why the cross-validation evaluation is not used, and why the number of training rounds and batches set like this. Some important questions were also asked, but the article had already discussed and explained them in detail. The level of reviewers can be imagined by everyone. . . The above is for reference only! Hope everyone will publish more high-level papers!

(96) Thank | csmath

I have just completed a work and currently been organizing materials and preparing for submission. I just saw a few journals that the 38th floor mentioned, thinking that we have so many choices in the direction of cybernetics. Then I checked them one by one, but ... why CA, NEJM, Lancet, JAMA are all entirely medical journals! ! ! ! ! None of them are of cybernetic field! ! ! ! You are researching in computer, how can you talk about others? There is no need to fight for it. Don't speak too harshly. Everyone should share things like review cycle, difficulty, acceptance direction, etc. Our laboratory mentors generally require us considering IEEE T-ac, Automatica, and this journal in order for good research results. The first two publications were established for so long a time, and they are our best journals. This one is relatively new, but grows quickly. At present, it is indeed a good journal in our direction. I don’t know very well about other directions, but everyone, come on! I wish all masters and doctors graduate successfully, and don’t be bald, ha ha!

(21) Thank | belly

First review took more than 18 months, mainly because the two reviewers were irresponsible and delayed the review. In the end the reviewers might have been replaced. The first reviewer didn’t give too critical comments and suggested revision and re-submission; the second reviewer suggested acceptance after minor revisions, while the third reviewer sent back the wrong review comments, which were about another article (the comments were mostly on problems in writing figures, but my paper did not have those problems). The third reviewer’s suggestion was to revise and re-submit. After more than a month, I got from the editor the third reviewer's correct comments, and those comments were not hard to address. The editorial decision was to revise and re-submit. We have submitted the revision and are hoping to have good results. I hope the reviewers can be more responsible; after all, this is a TOP journal!

(6) Thank | Man

How can we reform it to make it a large water magazine that can be sent with just one click like in previous years?

(0) Thank | SeveresL

How long does it take for your appeal to be replied by the editor-in-chief?

(1) Thank | 孔庆北

May I ask if there is still a page limit for the revised manuscript for resubmission after rejection, just like the initial submission?

(0) Thank | qinyifan

Can I ask how long does it take for the status of "Awaiting Administrator Processing" recently?

(0) Thank | dirge117

After RR, it goes through UR status and becomes With Associate Editor. After one day, it changes back to UR. Will reviewers be added after resubmission? How many reviewers are usually added?

(0) Thank | 中！中！中！

I am too, it has been a month.

(0) Thank | Bourne

How many reviewers are usually appointed for the first review of IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, senior experts?

(0) Thank | 种子

Someone sent me a private message asking, I couldn't reply, so I'm replying here: peng.shi@adelaide.edu.au. Send it back, everyone please be polite to the chief editor.

(0) Thank | Hashdom

I cried, after waiting for 5 months for the review result, I received no news. The system sent 4 emails but there was no response. Finally, after sending a message to the editor, it was accepted on the third day. The editor is awesome.

(0) Thank | Hashdom

I have been in this state for 3 weeks without any changes.

(0) Thank | SCI冲！

May I ask if "awaiting AE assignment" means looking for reviewers or waiting for an Associate Editor to be assigned?

(0) Thank | WHT6666

Please put your feedback in the appendix materials.

(0) Thank | lxy0101

Hello, may I ask if the reply to the rejection and the revised manuscript should be included in the cover letter after resubmission?

(0) Thank | helloyyq

Hello, may I ask if the response and revised manuscript after a rejection and resubmission should be included in the cover letter?

(0) Thank | helloyyq

My first review has also been almost 9 months. How many reviewers do you have for your first review?

(0) Thank | Miyukii

I envy you for getting results in half a year or one year. Sigh, I have never encountered such a slow progress before.

(0) Thank | 张三丰2024

Oh, who has been slowing down my progress? 
Submitted in October 2022
Received reviews in August 2023
Submitted revisions in October 2023
Graduated with a PhD in June 2024, didn't care much as it was for my PhD institution and not relevant to my new job
Still under review in December 2024, first time pushing for a decision
Still under review in March 2025, second time pushing for a decision
Finally promoted to associate editor in May 2025, wow!
It's been 2.6 years now, so difficult!!!
I've wanted to withdraw the submission several times, if it gets accepted, there's a higher chance of getting provincial funding
They keep delaying the review, are they trying to reject it? My 2.6 years
I will never submit to TCYB again, it's too difficult for me.

(0) Thank | 张三丰2024

Sharing submission timeline for the paper:

2024.05.16, Submitted
2024.08.31, Reject & Resubmit
2024.10.15, Resubmit
2025.03.08, Revision - Regular Paper
2025.04.26, Accept as Regular Paper

The first and second rounds with associate editor are approximately one week each, while the third round with associate editor is two days. The decision by the EIC for all three rounds is within two days.

Each round includes three reviewers, with 2-3 reviewers being changed for the second round based on reviewer comments. The reviewers for the third round should be the same as the second round.

(1) Thank | lxy0101

Congratulations! Has the second reviewer finished reviewing the manuscript? How many days did it take for the second review with the Associate Editor to yield results?

(0) Thank | doublehe

Congratulations, how many reviewers are there in the first round of review, have you added more later?

(0) Thank | lyx

2024.9.20 submitted
2025.1.4   R&R
2025.3.6   resubmitted
2025.4.21 Minor Revisions as Regular Paper
2025.4.27 Accept as Regular Paper

(1) Thank | 绝艺