I recently have a paper rejected from a very good (but not the top) journal. The referee report said the result was good and certainly belong there, but he did not think I did enough to back up my claims (it was a rather long and harsh criticism at the exposition). Now I know for sure that my result is good and my proofs are correct, should I resubmit to the same journal after rewriting it.
Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)
|
2
|
||||||
|
closed as off topic by Andy Putman, Qiaochu Yuan, Deane Yang, Felipe Voloch, Igor Rivin Dec 23 2011 at 9:20 |
|
7
|
A paper can be accepted (maybe subject to minor changes), rejected with a request for certain major changes, or rejected outright. If your paper fits into the middle category (which the editor will usually make clear), you should do some major surgery on it and send it again to the same journal. If it is in the last category, do some major surgery on it and send it to a different journal. In neither case should you send it anywhere without changes after receiving a long negative report. Even if you disagree with it, you should take the report as evidence of how other specialist readers will regard your paper, including misunderstandings. |
||
|
|
You can accept an answer to one of your own questions by clicking the check mark next to it. This awards 15 reputation points to the person who answered and 2 reputation points to you.
|
0
|
yes you should resubmit it |
||||||||||
|
