Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
10.1 weeks
21.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
4
Accepted
2020
19.1 weeks
25.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
4
Accepted
2017
Motivation: The review process was overall very good. Reviewers' comments were very insightful and helped to significantly improve the final version of the article. However, I received the reviews only after more than 4 months.
11.7 weeks
15.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
2017
Motivation: Constructive remarks from the reviewers. Serious handle by the editor.
However, the editing process did not respect the mathematics typo I used and degrade it.
4.6 weeks
10.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
4
Accepted
2016
Motivation: Constructive remarks from the reviewers. Editor efficient and professional.