IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications Submission Guide

Source: Clarivate JCR 2024, IEEE editorial disclosures (accessed April 2026).

Source: JSAC author guidelines.

Use this page when deciding:

• whether the manuscript fits the active Call for Papers
• whether the technical contribution is substantive
• whether baseline comparisons are comprehensive

• a clear technical contribution to communications research
• match to the special-issue Call for Papers
• comprehensive baseline comparisons
• theoretical analysis
• a cover letter establishing scope match and contribution

• Scope mismatch with special-issue Call for Papers.
• Weak technical contribution.
• Missing comparison to state-of-the-art.
• Insufficient theoretical contribution.

JSAC is a flagship communications research journal.

Special-issue model: the journal differentiates from IEEE Transactions on Communications (broader) and IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications (specialty) by publishing focused special issues.

Theoretical-rigor expectation: editors expect mathematical or analytical foundation.

The 30-40% desk rejection rate: decisive editorial screen.

The strongest JSAC cover letters establish:

• the technical contribution
• the special-issue scope match
• the baseline comparison
• the theoretical analysis

• Is IEEE JSAC a good journal?

Before upload, run your manuscript through a JSAC scope and contribution readiness check.

In our pre-submission review work with communications manuscripts targeting JSAC, three patterns generate the most consistent desk rejections.

In our experience, roughly 35% of JSAC desk rejections trace to scope mismatch with the special-issue Call for Papers. In our experience, roughly 25% involve weak technical contribution. In our experience, roughly 20% arise from missing baseline comparisons.

• Scope mismatch with special-issue Call for Papers. JSAC special issues have specific topics. We observe submissions misaligned with active Call for Papers routinely desk-rejected.

• Weak technical contribution. Editors expect substantial technical advances. We see manuscripts reporting incremental extensions routinely declined.

• Missing comparison to state-of-the-art. JSAC specifically expects rigorous baseline comparison. We find papers without explicit comparison to recent leading systems routinely flagged. A JSAC scope and contribution readiness check can identify whether the package supports a submission.

Clarivate JCR 2024 bibliometric data places JSAC among top communications journals.

In pre-submission diagnostic work for top communications journals, we consistently see four signals that distinguish strong submissions from weak ones. First, scope match with the active Call for Papers must be explicit. Second, technical contribution must be substantive (theoretical, algorithmic, or system-level). Third, baseline comparison should cover state-of-the-art communications systems. Fourth, theoretical analysis should be rigorous.

The single most consistent feedback class we deliver in pre-submission diagnostics for JSAC is the scope-match distinction. JSAC special issues have specific Call for Papers topics. Submissions misaligned with the active CfP routinely receive scope mismatch desk rejections. We coach authors to read the CfP carefully and explicitly map manuscript contributions to specific CfP topics. Submissions framed as "we developed system X with property Y" routinely fail when the CfP requests work on different aspects. Submissions framed as "addressing CfP topic X, we contribute Y by exploiting Z" receive better editorial traction. The same logic applies across IEEE special-issue journals: editors are operating with focused special-issue inventory, and the submissions that get traction articulate the explicit CfP match.

Beyond the rubric checks, three pre-submission diagnostic patterns recur most often in the manuscripts we review for JSAC. First, manuscripts where the cover letter doesn't reference the specific CfP topic are flagged at desk for scope concerns. Second, manuscripts where baseline comparison uses outdated systems are flagged for comparison gaps. Third, manuscripts that lack engagement with JSAC's recent special issues are at risk of being told the contribution doesn't fit the publication conversation.

The strongest manuscripts we coach distinguish themselves on three operational behaviors. First, they confine the cover letter to one page and explicitly map the manuscript to specific CfP topics. Second, they include a one-sentence elevator pitch in the cover letter's opening. Third, they identify the specific recent JSAC papers that this manuscript builds on and the specific competing work.

JSAC's distinctive feature is that nearly all submissions go through a Call for Papers special-issue cycle. This creates editorial dynamics distinct from IEEE Transactions journals: each special issue has Guest Editors with focused topical expertise; review cycles are coordinated to enable timely thematic publication; and submissions outside the active CfP topic face higher desk-rejection probability than topically-aligned work. We coach authors to monitor JSAC's CfP page regularly and time submissions to align with active calls. Researchers who submit between special issues without a CfP match face longer review cycles and lower acceptance rates than those whose work aligns with an active call.