Subject:
Our revised paper and sincere applology for our late
From:
"Li Chen" <chen@tokyo.rist.or.jp>
Date:
Thu, 8 Nov 2001 12:36:10 +0900
To:
"Prof. Fox" <fox@mailer.csit.fsu.edu>
CC:
"Prof. Fujishiro" <fuji@is.ocha.ac.jp>
X-UIDL:
70868057e7010600
X-Mozilla-Status:
0001
X-Mozilla-Status2:
00000000
Received:
by mailer.csit.fsu.edu (mbox gcfpc) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Thu Nov 8 06:29:55 2001)
X-From_:
fox@mailer.csit.fsu.edu Thu Nov 8 06:26:19 2001
Return-Path:
<fox@mailer.csit.fsu.edu>
Delivered-To:
gcfpc@csit.fsu.edu
Received:
from dirac.csit.fsu.edu (dirac.csit.fsu.edu [144.174.128.44]) by mailer.csit.fsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C1C023A20 for <gcfpc@csit.fsu.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 06:26:16 -0500 (EST)
Received:
from localhost by dirac.csit.fsu.edu (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7) id GAA84856; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 06:26:10 -0500 (EST)
Resent-Message-Id:
<200111081126.GAA84856@dirac.csit.fsu.edu>
Delivered-To:
fox@csit.fsu.edu
Received:
from tokyo.rist.or.jp (rist01.tokyo.rist.or.jp [202.241.71.24]) by mailer.csit.fsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E816323A22 for <fox@mailer.csit.fsu.edu>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 22:29:27 -0500 (EST)
Received:
from RISTCHEN (rt01.tokyo.rist.or.jp [202.241.71.34]) by tokyo.rist.or.jp (8.9.3/3.7W) with SMTP id MAA27716; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 12:29:03 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID:
<001201c16806$82623050$015ca8c0@RISTCHEN>
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C16851.F1CC9200"
X-Priority:
3
X-MSMail-Priority:
Normal
X-Mailer:
Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE:
Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
Resent-To:
Geoffrey Fox <gcfpc@csit.fsu.edu>
Resent-Date:
Thu, 08 Nov 2001 06:26:08 -0500
Resent-From:
Geoffrey Fox <fox@mailer.csit.fsu.edu>

Dear Prof. Fox,
 
Attached is the revised version of our paper. I am very very sorry for our late. I think any words cannot express our appology. It must bring much troubles on your work. Thank you very much for your patience.
 
We revised our paper in the following points:
 
1. According to the referees' comment, our paper has a split personality. The parallel architecture and visualization algorithms haven't been connected smoothly. Now we changed our paper to just focus on parallel visualization techniques.
2. According to the referees' comment, our paper need much more technical depth. Now we put an special emphasis on feature analysis for large datasets which includes some new ideas.
3. Referees said our contents don't fit into the abstract well. Now we have made them coincide.
4. One referee suggested us to add some papers of Dr. Haimes as references. We have added into our paper.
5. We revised some English expressions.
 
Thank you very much again for your kind help!
 
Best regards,
 
Li Chen