system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
My paper has been rejected from a journal. How do I proceed from here?

My paper was under review for the past 6 weeks in a good journal (possibly best in a subfield of Computer science, IF -  around 5.1). Unfortunately today I received the decision that my paper was rejected based on the recommendations of 3 reviewers.

One reviewer suggested that the paper structure is 'good' but said that my paper needs additional literature and peer comparison to support the paper, which I think is good comment and will revise on that aspect. 

Another two reviews are very general as they asked me to provide more explanation for a few equations and parameters but didn't specifically mention any reason why they are rejecting my paper.
They have a few high-level comments on the advantages / disadvantages of my approach but didn't provide any specific feedback on my algorithm and experiments. Does it mean they 'acknowledge' the results of my paper as good? What does it mean? 


 How do I proceed from here? I feel my paper fits very well in the scope of this journal. Since my paper has been outrightly rejected after the review, may I revise and resubmit to the same journal? Does rebuttal to the reviewers make any difference to the outcome?

P.S: My PI and co-authors think that the paper is good and advised me to submit to another journal with similar scope, but it has less IF (around 2.7). Thanks.
gpt
Revise and resubmit to another journal. Spend hours reformatting your manuscript and references. Contemplate deleting the whole thing and forgetting about it. 

Your paper is dead at the current journal btw. Don’t send it back.