7/2/2023 0 Comments Allen earmanI hope that you continue to provide your professional expertise in this manner, and look forward to recognizing another set of outstanding reviewers next year. Please join me in thanking these reviewers for their exceptional service along with all others on the comprehensive list who have contributed to the continued success of this journal. Xuebing Zhang, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Netherlands (optical communications) Torbjorn Skauli, Norwegian Defence Research Establishment, Norway (hyperspectral imaging, detectors)ĭr. Zhou Sha, Tianjin University, China (optical systems, fiber sensors)ĭr. Michal Pawlowski, William Marsh Rice University, United States (biomedical optics)ĭr. Jacob Martin, Air Force Research Laboratory, United States (spectrometry)ĭr. Junrui Li, Oakland University, United States (interferometry, optical metrology)ĭr. The name Allen Earman has over 2 birth records, 1 death records, 1 criminal/court records, 5 address records, 2 phone records & more. Robert Grasso, Polaris Alpha, United States (lasers, remote sensing) Public Records for Allen Earman Found We found 2 entries for Allen Earman in the United States. Allen Earman, Avegant, United States (optoelectronics, fiber optics)ĭr. Peng Deng, Pennsylvania State University, United States (optical communications) Maria-Luisa Cruz Lopez, Universidad Panamericana, Mexico (holography)ĭr. This year, my selections are biased toward quality over quantity, favoring those reviewers who regularly provided very detailed and thorough assessments of the manuscripts they accepted to review.Īfter careful consideration, the following individuals are recognized as the top ten Optical Engineering reviewers for 2017:ĭr. Each has reviewed multiple Optical Engineering manuscripts over the past year, accepted a majority of review requests, completed their reviews on time, and consistently achieved strong ratings from the associate editors overseeing the peer review process. Based on a statistical analysis of manuscript review performance along with assessments and recommendations from the editorial board, I identified ten reviewers who have been notable in terms of the extent, timeliness, and quality of their reviews in 2017. As a small token of recognition, a comprehensive list of contributing reviewers for 2017 is provided in this issue.Īs has become my tradition, I once again dedicate this January editorial to recognizing a few of our top reviewers. For this reason, I am thankful for the reviewers who contribute their services to Optical Engineering, especially those who put forward a top-notch effort. We consider ourselves fortunate when we are able to line up reviewers who are responsive, objective, and thorough, characteristics that are really critical to making well-founded manuscript decisions. Prospective reviewers often decline the invitation to review for a variety of reasons, and sometimes reviewers who do agree to take on the case fall short in terms of timeliness or thoroughness. If I were to ask the editorial board what they consider to be the most challenging aspect of their associate editor responsibilities, I suspect the most common response would be the difficulty in securing high-quality reviews of submitted papers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |