|
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
b*******e
发帖数: 92 | 1 今天收到RFE的纸质通知，质疑Major signifiance by XM1244 @TSC
提交时候的证据有：5封独立推荐信。一封国内公司应用证明（无专利），一封别人使
用我的软件证明，大段引用的大概10篇穿插在推荐信中。其中引用排名四篇top 0.1%,
1%, 10%, 10%.
目前收到的通知说：
The petitioner submitted evidence that he has been cited on 200 occasions.
The petitioner indicates that his articles have been ranked among the top
percentage of journals for given fields in given years. The petitioner
submitted the following witness letters.
然后摘抄了两段来自于两个推荐信的两段话。接着XM1244说
This criterion has not been met because the evidence submitted does not show
that the beneficiary's contributions are considered to be of major
significance in the field of endeavor. The submitted evidence is
insufficient to establish that the petitioner's work has been of major
significance to the field as a whole. The petitioner's level of citation is
not of such magnitude to grand this criterion. The submitted reference
letters indicate that the proof of major significance lies in the petitioner
's success in being selected to be published in major journals. this is
insufficient to grant this criterion. the submitted evidence did not
indicate how the petitioner's research has been of major significance.
please submit independent corroborative evidence, as it is difficult to
grant this criterion based solely on citations and referee letters. To
assist the determining whether the beneficiary's contribution are original
and of major significance in the field, the petitioner may submit:
--> objective documentary evidence of significance of the beneficiary's
contribution to the field.
-->Documentary evidence that people throughout the field currently currently
consider the beneficiary's work important.
-->Evidence of the beneficiary's work being implemented by others. possible
evidence may include but is not limited to.
....
Note:letters and testimonies, if submitted, must provide as much detail as
possible about the beneficiary's contribution and must explain, in detail,
how the contribution was original and how they were of major significance.
General statements regarding the importance of the endeavors which are not
supported by documentary evidence are in sufficient.
求大牛们分析分析啊。这个RFE怎么应对啊？ 感觉他都忽视了我的软件使用和公司应用
证明信？ | f*********e
发帖数: 142 | | l*********5
发帖数: 171 | 3 找找媒体报道，深挖引用亮点，找审稿编辑写证明信（证明审稿人的优秀），然后找大
牛写推荐信，最后再强调你科研成果的实际应用，祝福楼主。。。 | J*d
发帖数: 433 | 4 写具体一点
,
【在 b*******e 的大作中提到】
: 今天收到RFE的纸质通知，质疑Major signifiance by XM1244 @TSC
: 提交时候的证据有：5封独立推荐信。一封国内公司应用证明（无专利），一封别人使
: 用我的软件证明，大段引用的大概10篇穿插在推荐信中。其中引用排名四篇top 0.1%,
: 1%, 10%, 10%.
: 目前收到的通知说：
: The petitioner submitted evidence that he has been cited on 200 occasions.
: The petitioner indicates that his articles have been ranked among the top
: percentage of journals for given fields in given years. The petitioner
: submitted the following witness letters.
: 然后摘抄了两段来自于两个推荐信的两段话。接着XM1244说
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
