Reviews for "Nonlinear Dynamics"

Average duration			Review reports (1^st review rnd.)
1^st rev. rnd	Tot. handling	Im. rejection	Number	Quality	Overall rating	Outcome	Year
6.0 weeks	6.3 weeks	n/a	2	5 (excellent)	5 (excellent)	Accepted	2021
10.3 weeks	13.4 weeks	n/a	3	4 (very good)	5 (excellent)	Accepted	2021
Motivation: I used to submit my most important works to NONLINEAR DYNAMICS, and a section as open problems is often supplied for readers' extensive guidance in this field. NONLINEAR DYNAMICS published many imporant papers about neurodynamics and they are helpful for readers. Most of them are highly cited and welcome to us. Most of the reviewers are active and the AEs are kind with supplying helpful additive suggestions.
1.4 weeks	1.4 weeks	n/a	0	n/a	5 (excellent)	Rejected	2020
15.1 weeks	19.3 weeks	n/a	3	5 (excellent)	5 (excellent)	Accepted	2020
Motivation: The submission of the paper was handled in a very efficient way by the editor. The overall procedure of the review was acceptable and constructive. Reviewers' comments have contained very professional questions and suggestions.
23.9 weeks	23.9 weeks	n/a	2	5 (excellent)	4 (very good)	Rejected	2018
Motivation: Takes for a long time.
4.0 weeks	4.0 weeks	n/a	3	5 (excellent)	5 (excellent)	Rejected	2017
Motivation: The reports were timely and professionally written.
19.7 weeks	23.0 weeks	n/a	2	5 (excellent)	5 (excellent)	Accepted	2017
Motivation: The submission of the paper was handled in a very efficient way by the editor. The overall process of review was quick and constructive. Reviewers' comments denoted a high knowledge of the subject and they certainly improved the manuscript.
4.3 weeks	4.3 weeks	n/a	2	0 (very bad)	1 (bad)	Rejected	2016
Motivation: The reviewers were not expert in the field of the paper and their comments were meaningless and some of them were theoritically incorrect. Generally, the reviwers' comments did not contain helpful information and suggestions to improve the quality of the paper.