Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
9.6 weeks
18.6 weeks
n/a
4 reports
2
2
Accepted
2015
Motivation: This paper was assigned to three reviewers, and in addition it was reviewed by the associate editor as well. Some of the reviews reflected personal opinions rather factual errors. Indeed, I later realized that the published paper contains some typos in one of the formulas. I wished the reviewers were more attentive to that, rather than pushing their own philosophy. Moreover, having 3+1 reviewers means a lot of constituencies to satisfy.