Research Scientist, Computer Science
A research scientist with 9+ years across computer science, information retrieval, and applied machine learning. Has prepared and reviewed survey manuscripts, tutorial articles, and field-synthesis papers for computer science venues. Brings practical experience with survey structure, benchmark coverage, reproducibility expectations, and the distinction between a primary research paper and a review article.
Journals reviewed for:
Computer Science Review, Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, ACM Computing Surveys
Research published in:
Published in computer science and applied machine learning venues
How to write a point-by-point response to reviewers for Nature Communications, where the rebuttal you write is published with your paper and major revisions usually mean new experiments.
Pre-submission and post-decision rebuttal guide for PLOS ONE authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on PLOS ONE-targeted manuscripts.
A pre-submission and post-decision rebuttal guide for PNAS authors, grounded in pre-submission reviews on PNAS-targeted manuscripts.
A point-by-point rebuttal guide for Scientific Reports authors, grounded in the journal's soundness-only criterion and in pre-submission reviews on Scientific Reports manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for Nature Structural and Molecular Biology (NSMB) authors targeting structural-biology research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on NSMB-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to ACS Catalysis, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something ACS Catalysis editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to ACS Nano, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something ACS Nano editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Analytical Chemistry (ACS), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Anal Chem editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission guide for Angewandte Chemie International Edition authors targeting chemistry advance for international Angewandte readership. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Angewandte IE-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for Angewandte Chemie International Edition authors targeting chemistry advance for international Angewandte readership. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Angewandte IE-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for Angewandte Chemie International Edition authors targeting chemistry advance for international Angewandte readership. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Angewandte IE-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for BMC Medicine authors targeting clinical research with population-level relevance and methodological transparency. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on BMC Medicine-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for BMC Medicine authors targeting clinical research with population-level relevance and methodological transparency. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on BMC Medicine-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for BMC Medicine authors targeting clinical research with population-level relevance and methodological transparency. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on BMC Medicine-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for BMC Medicine authors targeting clinical research with population-level relevance and methodological transparency. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on BMC Medicine-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to BMJ Open, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something BMJ Open editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Cell Reports authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Cell Reports-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Cell authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Cell-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to Clinical Infectious Diseases (Oxford University Press), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something CID editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Construction and Building Materials (Elsevier), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something CBM editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Current Biology, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Current Biology editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Environmental Science & Technology (ACS), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something ES&T editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Food Chemistry (Elsevier), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Food Chemistry editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to International Journal of Molecular Sciences, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something IJMS editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on JAMA-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for JCI Insight (American Society for Clinical Investigation) authors targeting translational research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on JCI Insight-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for JCI Insight (American Society for Clinical Investigation) authors targeting translational research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on JCI Insight-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for JCI Insight (American Society for Clinical Investigation) authors targeting translational research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on JCI Insight-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for JCI Insight (American Society for Clinical Investigation) authors targeting translational research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on JCI Insight-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to JCI Insight (American Society for Clinical Investigation), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something JCI Insight editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Journal of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something JCO editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Journal of Colloid and Interface Science (Elsevier), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something JCIS editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Journal of Hazardous Materials (Elsevier), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something JHazMat editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Journal of Materials Chemistry A (RSC), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something JMCA editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for The Lancet (Elsevier) authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on The Lancet-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to Molecular Cell, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Molecular Cell editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Nano Letters (ACS), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Nano Letters editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Nature authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Nature-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for Nature Structural and Molecular Biology (NSMB) authors targeting structural-biology research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on NSMB-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for Nature Structural and Molecular Biology (NSMB) authors targeting structural-biology research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on NSMB-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to Nature Structural and Molecular Biology (NSMB), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something NSMB editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission guide for Nature Structural and Molecular Biology (NSMB) authors targeting structural-biology research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on NSMB-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on NEJM-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to Neuron (Cell Press), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Neuron editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Physical Review D (APS), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Physical Review D editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Physical Review Letters (PRL), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Physical Review Letters editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Physical Review Letters (PRL) authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Physical Review Letters-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to PLOS Medicine, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something PLOS Medicine editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission guide for PNAS Nexus (NAS) authors targeting broad-impact research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on PNAS Nexus-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for PNAS Nexus (NAS) authors targeting broad-impact research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on PNAS Nexus-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for PNAS Nexus (NAS) authors targeting broad-impact research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on PNAS Nexus-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission guide for PNAS Nexus (NAS) authors targeting broad-impact research. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on PNAS Nexus-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to PNAS Nexus (NAS), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something PNAS Nexus editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to RSC Advances, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something RSC Advances editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Science, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Science editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Science authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Science-targeted manuscripts.
Before submitting to Small (Wiley), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Small editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Sustainability (MDPI), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Sustainability editors check at desk-screen.
Before submitting to Water Research (Elsevier), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something Water Research editors check at desk-screen.
Hepatology impact factor is 18 with a 5-year JIF of 16. See the trend, rank, and what that number means before submission.
Aging Cell impact factor is 7.7 with a 5-year JIF of 8.9. See the trend, rank, and what it means before you submit.
Analytic Methods in Accident Research impact factor is 10.7 with CiteScore 23.3. See the trend, timing, and what that means before submission.
Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering impact factor is 13.1. See the trend, SJR, h-index, and what that means.
Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences impact factor is 15.6. See the trend, secondary metrics, and what that means before pitching a review.
Annual Review of Food Science and Technology impact factor is 15.4. See the trend, secondary metrics, and what that means before pitching a review.
Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering impact factor is 12.9. See the trend, SJR, and what that means.
Astronomy & Astrophysics impact factor is 6.1 with a 5-year JIF of 6.1. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
Biotechnology Advances impact factor is 14.1 with a 5-year JIF of 15.8. See the trend, rank, and what it means before you submit.
Brain impact factor is 12.6 with a 5-year JIF of 13.9. See the rank, trend, and what that number means before submission.
Carbon Neutrality impact factor is 11.2. See the JCR trend, SJR, h-index, first-decision speed, and what that means for authors.
Cell Stem Cell impact factor is 23.3 with a 5-year JIF of 24.4. See the rank, trend, and what that number means before submission.
Ceramics International impact factor is 6 with a 5-year JIF of 5.2. See the rank, trend, and what that number means before submission.
Circulation Research impact factor is 18 with a 5-year JIF of 23. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
Clinical Cancer Research impact factor is 10.9 with a 5-year JIF of 11.2. See rank, trend, and what it means before submission.
Computer Science Review impact factor is 17.5 with CiteScore 38.4. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submitting a survey.
A practical Computer Science Review submission guide for authors deciding whether their survey is broad enough, expert enough, and useful enough for a general computer-science readership.
Environmental Science & Technology impact factor is 12.2 with a 5-year JIF of 13.1. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
Food Hydrocolloids impact factor is 13.8 with CiteScore 21.7. See the trend, secondary metrics, and what that means before submission.
A practical FnT IR submission guide covering the abstract-plus-TOC first step, monograph scope, and editorial fit.
Frontiers in Microbiology impact factor is 5.8 with a 5-year JIF of 5.2. See rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
Gut impact factor is 24.6 with a 5-year JIF of 26.7. See the trend, rank, and what that number means before submission.
JACC impact factor is 22.3 with a 5-year JIF of 25.6. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
JAMA Cardiology impact factor is 15.2 with a 5-year JIF of 16.3. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
Journal of Clinical Investigation impact factor is 14.3 with a 5-year JIF of 15. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
Journal of Neuroscience impact factor is 4.3 with a 5-year JIF of 5.0. See the rank, trend, and what that number means before submission.
Lancet Infectious Diseases impact factor is 29.4 with a 5-year JIF of 26. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
Lancet Neurology impact factor is 54.6 with a 5-year JIF of 60.2. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
ACS Catalysis publishes official review-speed metrics, but the useful question is still whether the catalyst story is complete enough to survive them.
Advanced Energy Materials can move quickly on obvious fit questions, but the real timing depends on whether the paper proves a field-level energy consequence.
Analytical Chemistry publishes clear review-speed metrics, but the real submission issue is whether the paper advances measurement science strongly enough.
Applied Energy has a quick editorial front end, but the real path still depends on whether the paper is systems-level enough to survive review.
Bioinformatics is usually fast enough to desk-reject weak method papers early, but reviewed papers still depend on validation and tool trust.
Bioresource Technology publishes unusually clear timing metrics, but the main issue is still whether the paper is genuinely a bioresource-technology paper.
Brain formatting is mostly about clean manuscript architecture: editable files, title limits, structured section order, declarations, thumbnails, and a package that does not rely on the supplement to explain itself.
Cancer Research can make an early decision quickly, but the useful issue is whether the paper is mechanistic enough for AACR's flagship biology audience.
Carbohydrate Polymers formatting problems are usually package problems: named polymer focus, glycan characterization, a 300-word abstract, a required graphical abstract, and a clean Elsevier file stack.
Cell Stem Cell cover letters work when they show function first, keep the mechanism claim disciplined, and explain why the story is complete enough for review now.
Cell Stem Cell formatting is really article-shaping: article type, 150-word summary, figure count, graphical abstract, STAR Methods, and reviewer-ready data access all need to support the same claim.
Ceramics International formatting problems are usually package-discipline problems: a concise abstract, category-coded keywords, reproducible methods, and artwork files that support one ceramics story.
Circulation Research cover letters work when they make the mechanistic cardiovascular case quickly and avoid sounding like a generic cardiology pitch.
Circulation Research formatting problems are usually mechanism-package problems: the abstract, figure order, supplement, and disclosure layer all have to support one mechanistic cardiovascular claim.
Circulation Research is not a casual cardiovascular venue. The review clock mainly reflects how fast the editors can tell whether the paper is mechanistic enough.
Clinical Cancer Research can reject weak translational packages early, but manuscripts that survive review still move on a multi-week oncology timeline.
Current Biology cover letters work when they state one biological point clearly, explain the broad readership case, and avoid sounding like a redirected specialist manuscript.
Current Biology formatting problems are usually package problems: concise story shape, a 175-word abstract, a clean Cell Press manuscript file, and methods/data language that all point to the same biological claim.
Current Biology moves quickly at the front end, but the useful distinction is between the very fast triage clock and the slower path for papers that really enter review.
Diabetes Care can reject quickly at the desk, but the longer editorial review stage is what most authors underestimate.
EMBO Journal often decides quickly at the editorial stage, but mechanistic papers that clear triage still face a hard multi-round review path.
JACC cover letters work when they explain the broad cardiovascular consequence, the flagship readership case, and why the manuscript belongs in JACC specifically.
JACC formatting is really clinical-package formatting: title discipline, structured abstract, central illustration, perspectives, disclosures, and a manuscript that looks ready for a fast editorial read.
JACC's own public messaging is speed-first, but the real point is that the journal forms a view quickly on whether the manuscript deserves the flagship audience.
JAMA Cardiology cover letters work when they show a broad cardiology consequence quickly and avoid sounding like a prestige pitch for a narrower paper.
JAMA Cardiology formatting is not mainly stylistic. It is a disciplined JAMA Network package: 3000-word research paper, structured abstract, Key Points, reporting checklist, data sharing, and clean display-item limits.
Lancet Infectious Diseases cover letters work when they show why the result matters beyond one local setting and why a global infectious-disease readership should care now.
Lancet Infectious Diseases formatting is really editorial packaging: abstract discipline, selective figures and references, reporting files, and a package that proves the paper travels beyond one local setting.
Lancet Infectious Diseases is a good example of a journal where timing is mostly a function of consequence. Papers with obvious mismatch can move fast. Papers that are plausible but not clearly world-leading can spend more time in editorial sorting.
Lancet Neurology cover letters work when they explain what changes for neurologists, why the manuscript is broad enough, and why the paper belongs here specifically.
Lancet Neurology formatting is really editorial packaging: word limits, exact abstract headings, figure and reference caps, reporting checklists, and a data-sharing statement all have to line up.
Lancet Neurology is a journal where the first useful timing question is not how fast peer review runs, but how quickly the editors decide whether the paper has enough broad clinical-neurology consequence to deserve review at all.
Molecular Psychiatry cover letters work when they explain the psychiatric consequence clearly, keep translational claims disciplined, and prove the paper belongs in this journal.
Molecular Psychiatry formatting problems are usually package-identity problems: an unstructured abstract, a 5,000-word article shape, no keywords, and a manuscript that still has to prove real psychiatric relevance.
Nature Neuroscience cover letters work when they explain the causal advance, the broad field consequence, and why the package is already complete enough.
Nature Neuroscience formatting is really a submission-readiness test: one editorially readable manuscript file, clear figures and methods, broad-neuroscience writing, and source-data discipline.
Nature Neuroscience looks fast at the first screen and slow across the whole path. Both are true. The journal decides quickly whether the paper belongs in the conversation, then takes much longer to turn a live file into an accepted one.
A Science Translational Medicine cover letter works when it proves the manuscript already bridges mechanism and human relevance in the main data.
Science Translational Medicine formatting is really translational-package discipline: title length, concise abstract, article limits, figure economy, and a submission stack that proves the human bridge is already in the data.
Water Research formatting problems are usually package-discipline problems: a concise abstract, clean title page, required highlights, sensible keywords, and a manuscript that looks broader than one local study.
Hepatology APC uses the latest public LWW fee schedule: $3,510 CC BY-NC-ND or $3,900 CC BY. Coverage, metrics, and fit.
A workflow-focused Remote Sensing submission process guide covering what happens after upload, what triage is testing, and where papers lose time.
A practical guide to submitting to Cell Metabolism, including fit, mechanistic expectations, disease relevance, and how to prepare a review-ready package.
A practical Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology submission guide for authors deciding whether a review concept is broad, authoritative, and timely enough to pitch.
ACME submission guide: comprehensive review with field-defining synthesis on engineering computational methods.
Annual Review of Food Science and Technology guide for commissioned reviews, synthesis fit, and author-ready files.
Endoscopy submission guide covering Thieme ScholarOne submission, article limits, clinical-trial registration, video rules, and procedural fit.
Applied Sciences submission guide covering scope, submission setup, editorial fit, and what to tighten before peer review.
Aging Cell submission guide covering scope, aging-specific fit, reviewer expectations, and the mistakes that weaken a submission.
Cell Metabolism submission guide: editorial fit, in vivo expectations, cover letter framing, and the preparation issues that stop most manuscripts.
ACS Catalysis requires AI disclosure under ACS rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for ACS Catalysis submissions.
ACS Nano requires AI disclosure under ACS rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for ACS Nano submissions.
Advanced Functional Materials requires AI disclosure under Wiley rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for AFM submissions.
Advanced Materials requires AI disclosure under Wiley rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Advanced Materials submissions.
Analytical Chemistry (ACS) requires AI disclosure under the publisher rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Anal Chem submissions.
Angewandte Chemie International Edition requires AI disclosure under Wiley rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Angewandte IE submissions.
BMC Medicine requires AI disclosure under Springer Nature rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for BMC Medicine submissions.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for The BMJ (British Medical Journal) authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on The BMJ-targeted manuscripts.
BMJ Open requires AI disclosure under BMJ rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for BMJ Open submissions.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Cell authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Cell-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Cell authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Cell-targeted manuscripts.
Clinical Infectious Diseases (Oxford University Press) requires AI disclosure under the publisher rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for CID submissions.
Construction and Building Materials (Elsevier) requires AI disclosure under Elsevier rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for CBM submissions.
Current Biology requires AI disclosure under Cell Press rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Current Biology submissions.
Environmental Science & Technology (ACS) requires AI disclosure under ACS rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for ES&T submissions.
Food Chemistry (Elsevier) requires AI disclosure under Elsevier rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Food Chemistry submissions.
International Journal of Molecular Sciences requires AI disclosure under MDPI rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for IJMS submissions.
JCI Insight (American Society for Clinical Investigation) requires AI disclosure under the publisher rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for JCI Insight submissions.
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science (Elsevier) requires AI disclosure under Elsevier rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for JCIS submissions.
Journal of Hazardous Materials (Elsevier) requires AI disclosure under Elsevier rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for JHazMat submissions.
Journal of Materials Chemistry A (RSC) requires AI disclosure under the publisher rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for JMCA submissions.
Journal of Physical Chemistry C (ACS) requires AI disclosure under the publisher rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for JPCC submissions.
Before submitting to Journal of Physical Chemistry C (ACS), verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something JPCC editors check at desk-screen.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for The Lancet (Elsevier) authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on The Lancet-targeted manuscripts.
Nano Letters (ACS) requires AI disclosure under the publisher rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Nano Letters submissions.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Nature authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Nature-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Nature authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Nature-targeted manuscripts.
Nature Structural and Molecular Biology (NSMB) requires AI disclosure under Springer Nature rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for NSMB submissions.
Physical Review D (APS) requires AI disclosure under APS rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Physical Review D submissions.
Physical Review Letters (PRL) requires AI disclosure under APS rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Physical Review Letters submissions.
PLOS Medicine requires AI disclosure under PLOS rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for PLOS Medicine submissions.
PNAS Nexus (NAS) requires AI disclosure under the publisher rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for PNAS Nexus submissions.
RSC Advances requires AI disclosure under RSC rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for RSC Advances submissions.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Science authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Science-targeted manuscripts.
Pre-submission and post-decision guide for Science authors. Grounded in pre-submission reviews on Science-targeted manuscripts.
Science of The Total Environment requires AI disclosure under Elsevier rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for STOTEN submissions.
Before submitting to Science of The Total Environment, verify these 12 items covering scope-fit, methods completeness, data availability, ethics, and reference cleanliness. Each is something STOTEN editors check at desk-screen.
Small (Wiley) requires AI disclosure under Wiley rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Small submissions.
Sustainability (MDPI) requires AI disclosure under MDPI rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Sustainability submissions.
Water Research (Elsevier) requires AI disclosure under Elsevier rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Water Research submissions.
Applied Sciences desk rejections usually happen when the paper claims practical relevance without proving it. This guide shows the editorial screens to fix before submission.
Applied Sciences impact factor is 2.5 with a 5-year JIF of 2.7. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
Avoid desk rejection at AMAR by proving analytical novelty, accident-specific justification, and clearer safety consequence than model fit alone.
Avoid desk rejection at ARCBE by treating it as an invitation-led Annual Reviews journal and proposing a topic broad enough for field synthesis.
Avoid desk rejection at Annual Review of Food Science and Technology by treating it as an invitation-led review journal, not a cold-submission venue.
Avoid desk rejection at ACME by submitting a real state-of-the-art review with broad computational scope and balanced criticism.
Avoid desk rejection at FnT IR by pitching a real monograph proposal, not a normal survey or disguised research paper.
Avoid desk rejection at IEEE TEVC by proving a field-level EC contribution, not just benchmark gains on one application.
Materials impact factor is 3.2 with a 5-year JIF of 3.5. See the rank, trend, and what that means before submission.
Cell submission guide: mechanistic completeness requirements, figure standards, cover letter framing, and editorial failure patterns from review work.
Our reviewers include researchers like this one who have published in and reviewed for top journals. Get a structured pre-submission review before you submit.