Reviews for "Automatica"
| Journal title | Average duration | Review reports (1st review rnd.) |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (click to go to journal page) | 1st rev. rnd | Tot. handling | Im. rejection | Number | Quality | Overall rating | Outcome |
| Automatica | 17.4 weeks |
17.4 weeks |
n/a | 4 | 3 (good) |
4 (very good) |
Rejected |
| Automatica | 13.0 weeks |
27.0 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted |
| Automatica | 26.0 weeks |
39.1 weeks |
n/a | 4 | 3 (good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted |
| Automatica | 21.7 weeks |
21.7 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted |
| Automatica | 26.0 weeks |
39.1 weeks |
n/a | 4 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted |
| Automatica | 39.1 weeks |
60.8 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
0 (very bad) |
Rejected |
| Motivation: The decision to reject on the basis of being out of scope for the journal needs to be made immediately, not after sixteen months in process. | |||||||
| Automatica | 6.9 weeks |
6.9 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 5 (excellent) |
3 (good) |
Rejected |
| Motivation: The reviewers found a subtle but serious flaw in the mathematics. The flaw was fixable, so I regret the reject/no resubmission decision, but it was handled fairly. | |||||||