ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces

Before submitting, I said that if it got accepted, I will write a submission experience and share it with you. This is the first time I submitted to ACS catalyst. One revision and one rejection were required, and the editor rejected the manuscript. Based on the fact that the first reviewer did not understand the article too well, we wrote a letter of appeal. After 23 days, the editor upheld the original judgment and rejected the manuscript. After the revision, I submitted it to ACB, but it was recommended to transferred to JC because of inappropriateness. It was then assigned to a Japanese editor in JC and it was not sent for review on the grounds of inappropriateness. We had to take the alternative and submitted it to CJC, however, it aimed to be the top 12% of the industry, and didn’t send it for review because of inappropriateness. It was at the time of the New Year, we had no choice, my supervisor was frustrated and suggested to submit to EST. I was not reconciled and insisted on submitting to a Q1 journal. After Chinese New Year, we revised the abstract and introduction and transferred it to AMI on March 2. After 25 days, we received the result of two revisions and one rejection. The editor Pi-Tai Chou showed mercy and required the revision and resubmission. It took 45 days to supplement the experiments and characterizations, and it was returned on April 16. It may because the evaluation given by the reviewer who rejected it was not bad (most of the comments required for supplementing experiments), so the editor sent it back to the three reviewers of the first review. Two of them accepted it directly after 20 days, but the reviewer who required a minor revision in the first review requested a major revision, but it only required three sentences to be changed and detailed XRD analysis. Five days later when I went to the toilet, the boss called me and said it was accepted. I got lots of congratulations from the junior fellow apprentices in the group and I was so relieved. The process is not easy, and only yourself knows. After the entrance examination and enrollment, I changed my subject in the middle. During the three-year Ph.D. period, I’d been waiting for the publication of it to barely graduate. An extension of one month had already been applied because of the epidemic, and I have to stand on my own feet for the rest of the way. Thank you for helping me, and wish AMI better and better!

(70) Thank | 科研的狗

27-Sep-2019 submitted; 28-Sep-2019 editor assigned; 04-Nov-2019 review comments received. (1 reviewer did not take it seriously. He said that he didn’t see the pictures and explanations, which actually existed, and he rejected the manuscript. The other two basically did not raise any questions, and both required minor revisions. The editor required us to make a major revision); 09-Nov-2019 Revision submitted; 18-Nov-2019 The second revision was required. It was sent to the original reviewer who rejected it before for review and it was accepted after minor revisions was made. We felt it was going to be accepted as the three reviewers all agreed to accept after minor revisions!!) 26-Nov-2019 Revised submission; 09-Dec-2019 Rejected and resubmitted was requested. Several references were listed for comparing, which were completely different systems and methods, completely different innovation points and concerns, and the activity in our method far exceeded them)! Really confused. 12-Dec-2019 A rebuttal letter and revised version was submitted. 31-Dec-2019 Received a reminder from the editor, asking me to compare the differences between our article and the documents attached in their letter. The reminder was sent earlier on December 17, but it turned out to be sent to another mailbox of mine. It was thus delayed for half a month. 29-Jan-2020 They required revisions to the Supplementary Journal Cover we originally submitted. 30-Jan-2020 Format confirmation. 31-Jan-2020 Accepted. 3-Feb-2020 Our cover image was not adopted. This article is really troublesome!

(3) Thank | 五牛

2019.04.14 ACS NANO directly rejected it; 2019.04.23 transferred from CM to ACS AMI; 2019.04.28 submitted to AMI; 2019.05.04 editor assigned; 2019.05.07 sent for review; 2019.06.07 comments for the first review received, two major revisions and one minor revision were required. The reviewers were quite professional, they gave lots of constructive opinions, and the quality of the article is greatly improved. The editor gave a 21-day modification time. 2019.06.27 We respond the revision with nearly 30 pages of reply letter, which explained the questions in detail, and supplemented experiments as much as possible, and for those that can not be supplemented, we also explained why and promised that it will be solved later. During the period, the response letter file was damaged, and it was fixed in every possible way, and I was scared to death. 2019.07.24 The comments of the second review returned, the original reviewers who required minor revision before directly accepted it, and the reviewers required major revisions gave a constructive comment. Nice! 2019.07.24 Revised manuscript submitted that night. 2019.07.25 In the early morning, it was accepted. The editor, Dr. David Whitten, was a senior professor, who’s very professional and responsible, and participates in reviewing the manuscript. The comments raised are of great help to improve the quality of the article, and the efficiency is extremely high. Thank you very much.

(7) Thank | wodesci

I submitted the manuscript on January 25th, and on April 10,  I received revision suggestions from three reviewers. They raised seven questions and the editor said it would need revision pending a second round of external review. On May 28th, I received further review comments. I submitted the revised manuscript on June 7. It was returned on June 11, and the editor said, “I would be pleased to consider further for publication.” There were small technical problems. I returned the revised draft on the same day.

(0) Thank | jkl

The volume of this journal is too large, and the impact factor will rise to around 9 in recent years, but it will not last long. After that, it will remain at the level of about 7 points.There are too many new publications.

(3) Thank | 顺子

Personal first SCI article, select ami want to try it, I did not expect to have a message soon.Three reviewers, one directly published, one minor repair, one refused draft, edited to the overhaul, made up a few experiments, returned after about twenty days, received directly two days later, the efficiency is very high!

(6) Thank | zqq7060

Submitted on January 10th, no editor selected, still is Submitted to Editorial Office, has not been assigned to edit, is it normal?In addition: Manuscript ID: am-2019-00**5d; What does the ending d mean?

(4) Thank | htu

2018-10-10 Initial submission2018-10-10 With editor-in-chief2018-10-12 Electronic journal publishing agreement form request2018-10-12 Assigned to editor2018-11-23 Revision requested2018-12-01 Revision submission2018-12-01 Assigned to editor2018-12-24 Revision requested2019-01-03 Revision submission2019-01-03 Assigned to editor2019-01-11 Cover art accepted2019-01-14 Accepted

(11) Thank | Jeffreyyz

I am doing electrocatalytic and energy storage materials, Master's career, the first SCIAfter the overhaul, minor repairs, and the final reception for a total of 4.5 months, the detailed review process can be found on the homepage:Title: Three-Dimensional Interconnected Network Architecture with Homogeneously Dispersed Carbon Nanotubes and Layered MoS2 as a Highly Efficient Cathode Catalyst for Lithium–Oxygen BatteryLink: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsami.8b06912Welcome to correct me and reference, thank you.

(9) Thank | Anjun Hu

Received 22 May 2018Date accepted 12 July 2018Published online 12 July 2018Published in print 15 August 2018Three reviewers, two overhauls, one minor repair, the editor gave the overhaul, let the supplementary experiment, and repaired it in 21 days.After the reply, receive it directly on the third day.Very efficient, editing is very good!I hope ACS ami will be better and better!

(2) Thank | Hstrong

Submission of acs nano, distribution of big cattle editor, directly refused for reasons of not suitable, it is recommended to switch to acs ami new publication ACS Applied Nano Materials.After refusing to switch, 9/26 re-submited ami,Waiting for 40 days, returning 1 review comments, 3 reviewers, two positives (top20%), one raised 19 questions, overhaul, and allowed to modify English.After 20 days, I wrote a reply of 5,000 thousand words, polished the body of English, and did not change the content. I drew a few more pictures, returned, and received it after one week.

(8) Thank | haha123

Excuse me, is there any article on mechanical friction in this journal, and the submission has been rejected?There are recommendations in the comments, but I did not find it. What is the title of the article published on the 35th and 157th floors of the 23rd floor? Regarding the mechanical friction, the reference learning

(1) Thank | 科研小王子

Submitted at the end of August, comments submitted for review in early October, two reviewers, one minor repair, one overhaul, and some experiments, returning after 20 days, and receiving it directly after 20 days.The efficiency is quite high.

(3) Thank | hahahaha

The second time the journal was selectd, submitted for review one week later, and the review was rejected for 2 months.The journal level is goodIt is still very helpful for reviewers to ask many questions.

(3) Thank | 古月

2018-08-11 Submission2018-08-17 Assignment Editor2018-09-20 A minor repair, a major repair, a rejection of the draft, the editor refused to recommend the transfer to the publication2018-09-26 Appeal2018-10-03 The appeal was successful, the editor gave a 20-day standard overhaul2018-10-22 Reply to comments2018-11-05 ReceivingConfidence in your own work, it is important to get the opportunity to compete with the editors.~

(10) Thank | 风成夜响

Accepted after the overhaul, it took 45 days from the submission.

(6) Thank | 和噶ss

For the review period:2018.5.8 submission;2018.6.6 Review comments back.Five reviewers, four are minor repairs, positive responses, one is not suitable for AMI, not recommended.The editor gave the overhaul and asked the article to polish.2018.6.22 Completion of the experiment as required, and the article allows the foreigner to retouch and review the comments.2018.7.10 The check rate is about 30%. The editor wrote a letter asking why and giving reasons.Thank you very much for this editor, there is no direct evidence.The reason for the reply on the day.2018.8.13 The second review comments back.The fifth reviewer at the time added a few more questions.2018.9.01 Revised review comments.I am waiting for the result.2018.10.8 Article acceptanceAfter a full five months, the middle is about to collapse and disappointed. I feel that everything has been encountered by myself and my luck is bad.However, fortunately, the final article accepted.

(11) Thank | 微扬

Share the submission process:7.25 uploading the first draft8.01 Signed Electronic Publishing Agreement9.04 returned to the first draft opinion, three reviewers, one suggested direct accept, and two suggested overhaul.Edit to overhaul.The reviewer's question is relatively pertinent, supplemented by the reviewer's opinion, and the experimental literature and existing experimental data that cannot be achieved by individual.10.11 Return to the revised draft (experiment is more time-consuming, but the editor only gives 20 days, and the middle applies for an extension)10.18 Editing Reply to Pre-Receive, Needs Format Change10.18 return to the revised draft on the same day10.20 Receiving.The first SCI was successfully received. In general, the journals were inefficient, the editors were very good, and the application was revised on the same day. The reviewers were also polite, professional, careful, and pointed out that some small language errors were proved.Read it carefully.I wish the journal will be better and better~

(1) Thank | 袅晴丝

I want to know if I will send an email to all authors or only to the author of the communication after the select???

(2) Thank | @Tring

7.9 Submission7.11 Assigning edits8.28 A major repair, a minor repair, edit to overhaul, give 20 days9.16 Revised.Filled up a few experiments, wrote a lot of things in the SI, the main text changed the language10.1 ReceivingRelatively fast, the reviewer's questions are also very sharp.

(1) Thank | 清明找河图

August 31 contributionOctober 2 Return to the review comments2 judges are all directly received and invited to submitted a coverThere is also an editor who asks to modify the format.No copyright agreement was filled in during the periodThe most positive review of this submission process, although our original target journal is NC, but still very happy, after all, the work is fully affirmed!

(3) Thank | 秤砣老师

2018.07.11Submission2018.07.16 assigned to the editor and mentions the electronic copyright agreement2018.08.27 returned the review comments, four reviewers, one minor repair, three overhauls (the opinions were positive, but the total number of comments was 19, very worried), the editor gave the overhaul, 20 days to modify the time, pending a secondRound of external review.2018.09.16 answer each question carefully, then return to the revised draft, add the experiment, but the individual can not do it, also made a detailed description2018.09.25 Technically minor problem, the editor confirms the name of the author,2018.0926 Back to modification2018.0928 accept waiting for proofTo sum up, the editor's opinion is very important, it can be modified, and the hope of careful revision is great.

(2) Thank | 帆布鞋女孩

Asking a journal, what do you mean by checking it?

(0) Thank | Jeffreyyz

2018.8.3chem rejects the post and submitteds AMI8.8 Copyright confirmation;8.25 The review comments came back, a minor repair, two overhauls, an editor to the overhaul, and a cover invitation.
      29 questions, carefully reply one by oneReturn to 9.5;9.13 Edit letter to pre-receive, confirm picture copyright
      Various small problems in the middle, toss several times9.18 Receive online

(6) Thank | 知之

August 5th, the 11th allocation editor, now September 4th, do not know the delivery is not, so panic

(4) Thank | 黑色