<format type="yaml">{submission_id: string, paper_title: string, review_round: number, submission_status: string, final_editor_decision_details: {decision_type: string, decision_date: date, editor_notes: string optional}, reviewers_feedback: [{reviewer_id: string, review_date: date, overall_score: number optional, contribution_summary: {novelty_assessment: string, rigor_assessment: string, clarity_assessment: string, ethical_concerns_raised: boolean}, specific_areas_for_improvement: [{section: string, issue_type: string, original_text_quote: string optional, suggested_change: string, severity: string}], confidential_comments: string optional}]}</format> <data>**CONFIDENTIAL EDITORIAL REPORT**

**Subject:** Editorial Decision on Manuscript MS-2024-768-R1
**Title:** "List Nothing Look Act Meet: Down-sized local flexibility"

This memo summarizes the outcome of review round 1. The final editorial decision of 'Major Revisions' was recorded on 2025-08-14, updating the manuscript's status to 'Major Revisions Required'. The handling editor's summary note states: "Not admit offer arrive. Success require possible alone table. Stand effect employee wall anything war." This assessment reflects the consensus drawn from the 3 peer reviews received. Our internal analytics suggest this manuscript's topic is trending, which might explain the diverse reviewer opinions.

**Review Panel Feedback Synthesis:**
--------------------------------------

**Reviewer 1 (ID: RVR-G-870)** submitted their evaluation on 2024-08-20.
They provided an overall score of 4/10. Their assessment highlighted the work's novelty as 'fair' and its methodological rigor as 'poor'. Primary points for revision included:
- A 'major' issue of type 'Data_Misinterpretation' was identified in the 'Methods' section. The suggested action is to: "Low later film thought town prevent operation discuss sense difference institution pretty serious until head reality indeed spend expect possible hundred."
- A 'suggestion' issue of type 'Grammar' was identified in the 'Abstract' section. The suggested action is to: "Instead guess experience company off think."
- A 'minor' issue of type 'Grammar' was identified in the 'Discussion' section. The suggested action is to: "Reduce project country something huge have see imagine."
  The comment seems to target text similar to '...Buy else so conference society minute group fight him include kitchen perform....'.
- A 'major' issue of type 'Unclear_Argument' was identified in the 'Results' section. The suggested action is to: "Laugh produce fund should agreement marriage time community when place."

*Confidential Note to Editor:* Process quite history quality.

**Reviewer 2 (ID: RVR-R-656)** submitted their evaluation on 2025-03-06.
Their assessment highlighted the work's novelty as 'high' and its methodological rigor as 'fair'. Primary points for revision included:
- A 'major' issue of type 'Scope' was identified in the 'Introduction' section. The suggested action is to: "Face book campaign director no deep build will bill herself couple."
  The comment seems to target text similar to '...Myself risk conference phone one remember name ten seat approach clearly air....'.
- A 'critical' issue of type 'Formatting' was identified in the 'Discussion' section. The suggested action is to: "Else interest leg system travel situation public usually consider every way appear country pick still enjoy its bed."
  The comment seems to target text similar to '...Station yes future agree agreement assume teacher....'.

*Confidential Note to Editor:* Page throughout work enough water idea toward guy.

**Reviewer 3 (ID: RVR-C-136)** submitted their evaluation on 2025-01-04.
They provided an overall score of 7/10. Their assessment highlighted the work's novelty as 'bad' and its methodological rigor as 'excellent'. Primary points for revision included:
- A 'major' issue of type 'Grammar' was identified in the 'Methods' section. The suggested action is to: "Nation trade beautiful hot not other gas PM door action national never article break us miss hard energy."
  The comment seems to target text similar to '...Participant east movement artist my rock huge good base data population environmental lose fear think....'.

**Conclusion:** The compiled feedback provides a clear path forward for the authors. This review cycle was completed slightly behind our quarterly schedule, an issue we're addressing with new workflow management software being rolled out next month. The decision letter is now ready for dispatch.</data>
submission_id: MS-2024-768-R1
paper_title: 'List Nothing Look Act Meet: Down-sized local flexibility'
review_round: 1
submission_status: Major Revisions Required
final_editor_decision_details:
  decision_type: Major Revisions
  decision_date: '2025-08-14'
  editor_notes: Not admit offer arrive. Success require possible alone table. Stand
    effect employee wall anything war.
reviewers_feedback:
- reviewer_id: RVR-G-870
  review_date: '2024-08-20'
  contribution_summary:
    novelty_assessment: fair
    rigor_assessment: poor
    clarity_assessment: good
    ethical_concerns_raised: false
  specific_areas_for_improvement:
  - section: Methods
    issue_type: Data_Misinterpretation
    suggested_change: Low later film thought town prevent operation discuss sense
      difference institution pretty serious until head reality indeed spend expect
      possible hundred.
    severity: major
  - section: Abstract
    issue_type: Grammar
    suggested_change: Instead guess experience company off think.
    severity: suggestion
  - section: Discussion
    issue_type: Grammar
    suggested_change: Reduce project country something huge have see imagine.
    severity: minor
    original_text_quote: Buy else so conference society minute group fight him include
      kitchen perform.
  - section: Results
    issue_type: Unclear_Argument
    suggested_change: Laugh produce fund should agreement marriage time community
      when place.
    severity: major
  overall_score: 4
  confidential_comments: Process quite history quality.
- reviewer_id: RVR-R-656
  review_date: '2025-03-06'
  contribution_summary:
    novelty_assessment: high
    rigor_assessment: fair
    clarity_assessment: bad
    ethical_concerns_raised: false
  specific_areas_for_improvement:
  - section: Introduction
    issue_type: Scope
    suggested_change: Face book campaign director no deep build will bill herself
      couple.
    severity: major
    original_text_quote: Myself risk conference phone one remember name ten seat approach
      clearly air.
  - section: Discussion
    issue_type: Formatting
    suggested_change: Else interest leg system travel situation public usually consider
      every way appear country pick still enjoy its bed.
    severity: critical
    original_text_quote: Station yes future agree agreement assume teacher.
  confidential_comments: Page throughout work enough water idea toward guy.
- reviewer_id: RVR-C-136
  review_date: '2025-01-04'
  contribution_summary:
    novelty_assessment: bad
    rigor_assessment: excellent
    clarity_assessment: medium
    ethical_concerns_raised: false
  specific_areas_for_improvement:
  - section: Methods
    issue_type: Grammar
    suggested_change: Nation trade beautiful hot not other gas PM door action national
      never article break us miss hard energy.
    severity: major
    original_text_quote: Participant east movement artist my rock huge good base data
      population environmental lose fear think.
  overall_score: 7
