Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
3.3 weeks
3.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
3
3
Rejected
2018
Motivation: Reviewer feels that the calculation was useful but not exactly matches the experimental results. He also feels that the physical interpretation of experimental and calculated results should be described in more detail.
7.1 weeks
7.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
5
5
Accepted
2016
Motivation: I always rate Optics Communications a very good journal. The editor and reviewers are quite professional, always fair and they judge the work on the basis of its quality and provide constructive comments. Our experience with this manuscript was quite good.