From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Jul 21 09:10:01 2014 From: "tim_mail^^^ukr.net" To: CCL Subject: CCL: Publication in J.Comput.Chem: your experience... Message-Id: <-50335-140721062533-16457-ewLo7Rm734N7K6f3yEZRcA_-_server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: tim_mail],[ukr.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-zPH053nZtyllj9dC/fqO" Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 13:25:23 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: tim_mail-$-ukr.net --=-zPH053nZtyllj9dC/fqO Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary Content-Disposition: inline Content-Length: 1078 Dear CCLers, I'd highly appreciate you sharing your experience with publishing in Wiley's Journal of Computational Chemistry. Recently we received a decision letter from this journal containing comments from a single reviewer only, and it appeared enough for the editor to declined our manuscript. Unfortunately, we have serious reasons to consider those comments as being far from objective and unbiased. Could someone please comment on whether it is typical for such a journal to send a manuscript to a single reviewer? As far as I know, all respectable journals typically rely on recommendations from  at least (!) two reviewers. Am I wrong? Thank you in advance! With my best wishes Tymofii Nikolaienko Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine P.S. The manuscript deals with a novel implementation of a classical analysis method to be used in conjunction with ab initio program packages. It contains both explanation of computational procedures and a sample application. Maybe we should consider some other journal to publish such a work? --=-zPH053nZtyllj9dC/fqO Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary Content-Disposition: inline Content-Length: 2298

Dear CCLers,

I'd highly appreciate you sharing your experience with
publishing in Wiley's Journal of Computational Chemistry.
Recently we received a decision letter from this journal
containing comments from a single reviewer only, and it

appeared enough for the editor to declined our manuscript.

Unfortunately, we have serious reasons to consider those

comments as being far from objective and unbiased.

Could someone please comment on whether it is typical
for such a journal to send a manuscript to a single

reviewer? As far as I know, all respectable journals typically

rely on recommendations from  at least (!) two reviewers. Am I wrong?


Thank you in advance!
With my best wishes
Tymofii Nikolaienko

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine



P.S. The manuscript deals with a novel implementation of a
classical analysis method to be used in conjunction with
ab initio program packages. It contains both explanation
of computational procedures and a sample application.
Maybe we should consider some other journal to publish
such a work?
 --=-zPH053nZtyllj9dC/fqO-- From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Jul 21 18:14:00 2014 From: "Abhishek Mishra mishralu:gmail.com" To: CCL Subject: CCL: Publication in J.Comput.Chem: your experience... Message-Id: <-50336-140721101150-7749-vWVCzRXQCkhxewZ/S3X8KA+/-server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Abhishek Mishra Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2a1d4d1bca104feb4af21 Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 15:11:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: Abhishek Mishra [mishralu:gmail.com] --001a11c2a1d4d1bca104feb4af21 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear Tymofii, This is very common problem with many journal editors, recently I had similar experience with POLYMER(Elsevier), where that one reviewer even didn't understand our work and finally same journal published same paper when I resubmitted as fresh submission again. So, I will suggest you to go for another better journal. Best of luck, Abhishek On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:25 AM, tim_mail^^^ukr.net < owner-chemistry[#]ccl.net> wrote: > Dear CCLers, > > I'd highly appreciate you sharing your experience with > publishing in Wiley's Journal of Computational Chemistry. > Recently we received a decision letter from this journal > containing comments from a single reviewer only, and it > > appeared enough for the editor to declined our manuscript. > > Unfortunately, we have serious reasons to consider those > > comments as being far from objective and unbiased. > Could someone please comment on whether it is typical > for such a journal to send a manuscript to a single > > reviewer? As far as I know, all respectable journals typically > > rely on recommendations from at least (!) two reviewers. Am I wrong? > > Thank you in advance! > With my best wishes > Tymofii Nikolaienko > > Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine > > > > P.S. The manuscript deals with a novel implementation of a > classical analys! is method to be used in conjunction with > ab initio program packages. It contains both explanation > of computational procedures and a sample application. > Maybe we should consider some other journal to publish > such a work? > ! > --001a11c2a1d4d1bca104feb4af21 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Tymofii,

This is very common= problem with many journal editors, recently I had similar experience with = POLYMER(Elsevier), where that one reviewer even didn't understand our w= ork and finally same journal published same paper when I resubmitted as fre= sh submission again. So, I will suggest you to go for another better journa= l.
Best of luck,
Abhishek


On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:25 AM, tim_mail^= ^^ukr.net <owner-chemistry[#]ccl.net> wrote:
=20

Dear CCLers,

I'd highly appreciate you sharing your= experience with
publishing in Wiley's Journal of Computational Chem= istry.
Recently we received a decision letter from this journal
containing comments from a single reviewer only, and it

appeared = enough for the editor to declined our manuscript.

Unfortunately, we h= ave serious reasons to consider those

comments as being far from obje= ctive and unbiased.

Could someone please comment on whether it is typical
for such a journal= to send a manuscript to a single

reviewer? As far as I know, all res= pectable journals typically

rely on recommendations from=C2=A0 at lea= st (!) two reviewers. Am I wrong?


Thank you in advance!
With my best wishes
Tymofii Nikolaienko=

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine


=
P.S. The manuscript deals with a novel implementation of a
classical= analys! is method to be used in conjunction with
ab initio program packages. It= contains both explanation
of computational procedures and a sample appl= ication.
Maybe we should consider some other journal to publish
such a work?
 =20 3D"" = = = = = = = = = = = !

--001a11c2a1d4d1bca104feb4af21-- From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Jul 21 18:49:00 2014 From: "Michel Petitjean petitjean.chiral : gmail.com" To: CCL Subject: CCL: Publication in J.Comput.Chem: your experience... Message-Id: <-50337-140721121111-1777-4w0Q+rra+WxPo/I4+YKq2g(~)server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Michel Petitjean Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c16ec28015a904feb65a59 Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:11:02 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: Michel Petitjean [petitjean.chiral|gmail.com] --001a11c16ec28015a904feb65a59 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear Tymofii Nikolaienko, I cannot conclude about JCC without having read both your manuscript and the reviewer's report. For almost all journals, the Editor is free to reject without taking any reviewer's opinion at all, even when the author is required to supply potential reviewers names. One report is more than none. I recommend that you to consider the report you got before attempting a resubmission to any journal, JCC or else. If you really do not like the report, I suggest that you ask to some experienced colleague to comment your manuscript before taking any action. Best regards, Michel Petitjean MTi, INSERM UMR-S 973, University Paris 7, 35 rue Helene Brion, 75205 Paris Cedex 13, France. Phone: +331 5727 8434; Fax: +331 5727 8372 E-mail: petitjean.chiral,+,gmail.com (preferred), michel.petitjean,+,univ-paris-diderot.fr http://petitjeanmichel.free.fr/itoweb.petitjean.html 2014-07-21 12:25 GMT+02:00 tim_mail^^^ukr.net : > Dear CCLers, > > I'd highly appreciate you sharing your experience with > publishing in Wiley's Journal of Computational Chemistry. > Recently we received a decision letter from this journal > containing comments from a single reviewer only, and it > appeared enough for the editor to declined our manuscript. > Unfortunately, we have serious reasons to consider those > comments as being far from objective and unbiased. > Could someone please comment on whether it is typical > for such a journal to send a manuscript to a single > reviewer? As far as I know, all respectable journals typically > rely on recommendations from at least (!) two reviewers. Am I wrong? > > Thank you in advance! > With my best wishes > Tymofii Nikolaienko > Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine > > > P.S. The manuscript deals with a novel implementation of a > classical analys! is method to be used in conjunction with > ab initio program packages. It contains both explanation > of computational procedures and a sample application. > Maybe we should consider some other journal to publish > such a work? --001a11c16ec28015a904feb65a59 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Tymofii Nikolaienko,

I cannot conclude about JCC without having read both your manuscr= ipt and the reviewer's report.
For alm= ost all journals, the Editor is free to reject without taking any reviewer&= #39;s opinion at all, even when the author is required to supply potential = reviewers names.
One report is more than none.
I recommend that you to consider the report you got= before attempting a resubmission to any journal, JCC or else.
If you really do not like the report, I suggest that you ask to some experi= enced colleague to comment your manuscript before taking any action.

Best reg= ards,

Michel Petitjean
MTi, INSERM UMR-S 973, University Paris 7,
35 ru= e Helene Brion, 75205 Paris Cedex 13, France.
Phone: +331 5727 8434; Fax= : +331 5727 8372
E-mail: p= etitjean.chiral,+,gmail.com (preferred),
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 michel.petitjean,+,univ-paris-diderot.fr
http://petitj= eanmichel.free.fr/itoweb.petitjean.html

2014-07-21 = 12:25 GMT+02:00 tim_mail^^^ukr.net <o= wner-chemistry,+,ccl.net>:

> Dear CCLers,
>
> I'd highly appreciate = you sharing your experience with
> publishing in Wiley's Journal = of Computational Chemistry.
> Recently we received a decision letter = > from this journal
> containing comments from a single reviewer only, and it

> app= eared enough for the editor to declined our manuscript.

> Unfortun= ately, we have serious reasons to consider those

> comments as bei= ng far from objective and unbiased.

> Could someone please comment on whether it is typical
> for such= a journal to send a manuscript to a single

> reviewer? As far as = I know, all respectable journals typically

> rely on recommendatio= ns from=C2=A0 at least (!) two reviewers. Am I wrong?

>
> Thank you in advance!
> With my best wishes
> = Tymofii Nikolaienko

> Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv= , Ukraine

>

>
> P.S. The manuscript deals with a n= ovel implementation of a
> classical analys! is method to be used in conjunction with
> ab initio program package= s. It contains both explanation
> of computational procedures and a s= ample application.
> Maybe we should consider some other journal to p= ublish
> such a work?
--001a11c16ec28015a904feb65a59-- From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Jul 21 19:24:00 2014 From: "Shahar Keinan skeinan() gmail.com" To: CCL Subject: CCL: Silicos-it Message-Id: <-50338-140721131856-9351-I0n5Hm8VsIH6pEEkWXOe1A(~)server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "Shahar Keinan" Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 13:18:55 -0400 Sent to CCL by: "Shahar Keinan" [skeinan/./gmail.com] Good afternoon everybody, Does anybody know what is the status of Silicos-it? It is a company that used to create filters for chem-informatics, such as ADMET filters or codes to align molecules, which I found to be very useful. I tried to go to their website and it is no longer active. Thank you in advance, Shahar From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Jul 21 21:27:01 2014 From: "=?UTF-8?B?Sm/Do28gQnJhbmTDo28=?= jbrandao\a/ualg.pt" To: CCL Subject: CCL: Publication in J.Comput.Chem: your experience... Message-Id: <-50339-140721174513-6660-jp64nWZS1c/ro17p/7t/JQ**server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm/Do28gQnJhbmTDo28=?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060000020002020200080803" Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 22:44:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: =?UTF-8?B?Sm/Do28gQnJhbmTDo28=?= [jbrandao]-[ualg.pt] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060000020002020200080803 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit My experience is very good. They sent my manuscript to three reviewers. João Brandão Em 21-07-2014 11:25, tim_mail^^^ukr.net escreveu: > > Dear CCLers, > > I'd highly appreciate you sharing your experience with > publishing in Wiley's Journal of Computational Chemistry. > Recently we received a decision letter from this journal > containing comments from a single reviewer only, and it > > appeared enough for the editor to declined our manuscript. > > Unfortunately, we have serious reasons to consider those > > comments as being far from objective and unbiased. > > Could someone please comment on whether it is typical > for such a journal to send a manuscript to a single > > reviewer? As far as I know, all respectable journals typically > > rely on recommendations from at least (!) two reviewers. Am I wrong? > > > Thank you in advance! > With my best wishes > Tymofii Nikolaienko > > Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine > > > > P.S. The manuscript deals with a novel implementation of a > classical analys! is method to be used in conjunction with > ab initio program packages. It contains both explanation > of computational procedures and a sample application. > Maybe we should consider some other journal to publish > such a work? > ! -- João Brandão Dep. de Química e Farmácia Universidade do Algarve 8005-139 Faro, Portugal e-mail: jbrandao]|[ualg.pt --------------060000020002020200080803 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit My experience is very good.
They sent my manuscript to three reviewers.

João Brandão

Em 21-07-2014 11:25, tim_mail^^^ukr.net escreveu:

Dear CCLers,

I'd highly appreciate you sharing your experience with
publishing in Wiley's Journal of Computational Chemistry.
Recently we received a decision letter from this journal
containing comments from a single reviewer only, and it

appeared enough for the editor to declined our manuscript.

Unfortunately, we have serious reasons to consider those

comments as being far from objective and unbiased.

Could someone please comment on whether it is typical
for such a journal to send a manuscript to a single

reviewer? As far as I know, all respectable journals typically

rely on recommendations from  at least (!) two reviewers. Am I wrong?


Thank you in advance!
With my best wishes
Tymofii Nikolaienko

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine



P.S. The manuscript deals with a novel implementation of a
classical analys! is method to be used in conjunction with
ab initio program packages. It contains both explanation
of computational procedures and a sample application.
Maybe we should consider some other journal to publish
such a work?
 ! 

-- 
João Brandão
Dep. de Química e Farmácia
Universidade do Algarve
8005-139 Faro, Portugal
e-mail: jbrandao]|[ualg.pt
--------------060000020002020200080803-- From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Jul 21 22:33:00 2014 From: "Susi Lehtola susi.lehtola]=[alumni.helsinki.fi" To: CCL Subject: CCL: Publication in J.Comput.Chem: your experience... Message-Id: <-50340-140721214737-17262-fbiJ8S24KCoLl+21ZxNysg~~server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Susi Lehtola Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:47:22 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: Susi Lehtola [susi.lehtola^_^alumni.helsinki.fi] On Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:11:02 +0200 "Michel Petitjean petitjean.chiral : gmail.com" wrote: > Dear Tymofii Nikolaienko, > > I cannot conclude about JCC without having read both your manuscript > and the reviewer's report. > For almost all journals, the Editor is free to reject without taking > any reviewer's opinion at all, even when the author is required to > supply potential reviewers names. > One report is more than none. > I recommend that you to consider the report you got before attempting > a resubmission to any journal, JCC or else. > If you really do not like the report, I suggest that you ask to some > experienced colleague to comment your manuscript before taking any > action. I agree. If the single referee did not understand the point of the manuscript and as a result bashed it, trying to clarify the point most likely would not hurt the manuscript. I say this from experience - one recent paper of mine got rejections from two referees, the first getting hung on a side issue with no relevance to the manuscript (and he was totally wrong in his point), and the second simply not getting it at all. Peer review is often a game of chance - one might get an unexceptional paper through into a very high impact paper just by having two referees that aren't experts in the field. Or, conversely, a good paper might get rejected from even a mediocre journal just because the referees weren't up to their task. Or, even worse, the referee is writing a paper on the same topic and doesn't want competition. This is just one property of the peer review system, as refereeing papers is pro bono work that is often out of something more productive (i.e. conducting your own research). A lot depends on the good will of the referees, and the editor. But it's not like there is a better system out there, either. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Susi Lehtola, PhD Research Associate susi.lehtola * alumni.helsinki.fi Department of Applied Physics http://www.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol Aalto University -----------------------------------------------------------------------