Sensors Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

Sensors uses the standard MDPI abstract format.

• Word limit: About 200 words maximum

• Structure: Single paragraph in the style of a structured abstract (background, methods, results, conclusion), without headings

• Citations: No reference to the bibliography or to figures

• Abbreviations: Define in the abstract, again in the main text, and again at the first figure or table

• Mathematical formulas: MDPI's layout guide says not to include equations in the abstract

• Keywords: Three to ten keywords after the abstract

The Instructions give the limit as about 200 words maximum, so treat 200 words as the ceiling. The abstract should be an objective representation of the article and must not contain results that are not presented and substantiated in the main text.

For sensor papers specifically, the abstract needs to answer three questions: what are you sensing, how does your sensor work, and what's the performance (limit of detection, sensitivity, response time, selectivity)? Reviewers expect numbers. Don't write "high sensitivity" when you can write "3.2 nM limit of detection for Hg2+ ions."

MDPI recommends keywords that are specific to the article yet reasonably common within the subject discipline. Being specific ("piezoelectric pressure sensor," "SERS substrate," "wearable glucose monitor") rather than generic ("sensor," "detection") helps readers find the paper.

Sensors follows MDPI's standard figure guidelines.

Figure specifications:

Discipline-specific expectations:

Sensor papers have unique figure needs. Circuit diagrams need clear component labels and pin numbers. Photographs of fabricated sensors need scale indicators. Calibration curves should include error bars and the linear range clearly marked. Response and recovery time curves should use consistent time scales.

For wearable and IoT sensor papers, photographs of the device worn or deployed in context add significant value. These application-context images don't need to be high art, but they should be well-lit and in focus, with the sensor clearly visible.

Signal processing figures (FFT spectra, wavelet transforms, noise analysis) should use consistent axis formatting. Log-scale axes need to be clearly labeled. Time-series data should include appropriate averaging windows noted in the caption.

Table formatting:

• Editable format, not images

• Sequential numbering

• Caption above the table; an optional footnote can explain the whole table or specific entries

• Vertical lines, blank rows and blank columns are not advised

Performance comparison tables are almost mandatory in sensor papers. A table comparing your sensor's performance (limit of detection, dynamic range, response time, selectivity) to published literature is expected by reviewers. Format these tables carefully because they're the first thing reviewers look at.

Sensors uses the MDPI reference style.

In-text citations: Numbers in square brackets [1], [2,3], [4-7]. Numbered in order of first appearance.

Reference list format:

1. Author, A.B.; Author, C.D. Title of Article. Abbreviated Journal Name Year, Volume, Page Range.

Key formatting details:

• Author names: Surname, then initials with periods

• Semicolons between authors

• Journal names abbreviated according to the ISO 4 rules (if you are unsure how to abbreviate a title, leave the full title and the Editorial Office will abbreviate it)

• Year, volume and page range; the MDPI reference style omits the issue number

• DOIs are not mandatory but highly encouraged

Abbreviating journal names is a common source of reference errors. MDPI's own example turns American Journal of Clinical Nutrition into "Am. J. Clin. Nutr." Your reference manager handles this if you use the MDPI output style.

Sensor papers often cite conference proceedings, technical standards, and patent documents. For IEEE conference papers, use the full conference name. For standards (ISO, IEEE, IEC), include the full standard number and year. For patents, include the patent number and date, as in MDPI's reference examples.

Sensors does not publish a cap on the number of references.

MDPI publishes supplementary material online alongside the article.

What belongs in supplementary material:

• Extended circuit schematics and PCB layouts

• Additional calibration data

• Code and firmware (for sensor systems papers)

• Extended selectivity and interference data

• Video demonstrations of sensor operation

• Raw datasets

Formatting:

• Any file format is accepted; MDPI recommends common, non-proprietary formats

• Use Figure S1, Table S1 numbering

• Each item mentioned in the main text

• Separate files for code, video, or large datasets

• Large data sets and files greater than 250 MB must be deposited in an external repository, preferably one that uses the DataCite mechanism

For sensor systems papers that include custom firmware or signal processing code, MDPI asks authors to release novel code either by depositing it in a recognized public repository such as GitHub or by uploading it as supplementary information. Code availability is increasingly expected by reviewers, especially for papers that include machine learning or deep learning components.

Data Availability Statement: Mandatory for Sensors manuscripts, except Book Review, Editorial, Obituary, Correction, Retraction and Expression of Concern. It sits in the back matter before the references and states where data supporting the findings can be accessed (a statement is still required where no new data were created or data cannot be shared).

Details specific to Sensors:

Special Issue context. Many Sensors papers are published as part of Special Issues. The Instructions for Authors do not set separate formatting rules for Special Issue submissions.

Sensors is published online by MDPI. The Instructions encourage figures and schemes in color (RGB at 8-bit per channel) at no additional cost.

MDPI XML conversion pipeline. MDPI's in-house production teams convert accepted manuscripts to XML. The Instructions say that using the template file will substantially shorten the time to complete copy-editing and publication of accepted manuscripts, which is the practical reason to use it from the start even though it is encouraged rather than mandatory at submission.

Author biographies are optional. The Instructions encourage authors to add a biography of 300 to 1500 characters to the submission and upload it to SciProfiles. If a manuscript is accepted, MDPI adds an icon linking to the author's ORCID profile in the published version.

Data descriptor papers. Sensors accepts Data Descriptor papers that describe datasets relevant to sensor research. These have their own structure: dataset title, DOI or unique identifier, creator, publisher and location, a dataset license, and sections for introduction, dataset description, methods, technical validation (required) and usage notes.

Sensors covers both hardware and software. The journal publishes papers on physical sensors, sensor signal processing, sensor networks, and sensor data analytics. The formatting expectations vary somewhat: hardware papers need more detailed fabrication and characterization figures, while software papers need algorithm descriptions and performance benchmarks. Both are held to the same overall formatting standards.

The most common issues at Sensors:

1. Journal names in references that are not abbreviated by the ISO 4 rules. MDPI asks for ISO 4 abbreviations and says the Editorial Office will abbreviate titles you leave in full.

1. Not using the MDPI template. Free format is accepted at first submission, but you will be asked to format the manuscript according to the journal guidelines at the revision stage, and the template shortens copy-editing. Download it before you start writing.

1. Missing data availability statement. Required for Sensors research manuscripts. Choose from the MDPI recommended statements or write a custom statement.

1. Scheme numbering. If your paper includes chemical reaction schemes or signal processing flowcharts labeled as "Scheme," they must be numbered separately from figures.

1. Heading numbering. MDPI numbers section headings (1., 1.2., 1.2.3.), so check that numbers you type by hand do not double up with any numbering the template applies.

For Sensors-targeted manuscripts, three patterns consistently predict formatting desk-screen failure at Sensors (MDPI). The patterns below are the same ones the journal's handling editors and outside reviewers flag at first-pass triage.

Scope-fit ambiguity in the abstract. Sensors editors move fastest on manuscripts whose contribution is obviously aligned with sensor research with quantified performance metrics (sensitivity, selectivity, dynamic range) and demonstrated practical-application validation. The named failure pattern: sensor papers without quantified performance metrics extend revision rounds. Check whether your abstract reads to Sensors's scope

Methods package incomplete for the journal's reviewer pool. Sensors reviewers expect specific methodological detail. Performance claims without state-of-the-art benchmark comparison extend reviewer consultation. Check if your methods package is reviewer-complete

Reference-list and clean-citation failure mode. MDPI's technical pre-check includes ethics and research integrity screening, so check your reference list for retracted papers before submitting. Check whether your reference list is clean against Crossref + Retraction Watch

Manusights submission-corpus signal for Sensors (MDPI). Of the manuscripts our team screened before submission to Sensors and peer venues in 2025, the editorial-culture mismatch most consistent across the cohort is sensors reviewers expect quantified performance metrics with explicit comparison to existing sensor benchmarks. In our analysis of anonymized Sensors-targeted submissions,

For manuscripts targeting Sensors, four patterns generate the most consistent desk-rejection outcomes.

MDPI template not used. MDPI encourages the current Word or LaTeX template, and using it substantially shortens copy-editing. Free-format submission is accepted at first submission, but the manuscript still has to contain the required sections (Author Information, Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Materials & Methods, Results, Conclusions, Figures and Tables with Captions, Funding Information, Author Contributions, Conflict of Interest and other Ethics Statements), and the Editorial Office checks adherence to the Instructions for Authors at its technical pre-check. MDPI updates its templates, so download the current one from the Sensors instructions page.

Abstract over about 200 words, or with references and undefined abbreviations. The Sensors Instructions give the abstract limit as about 200 words maximum, in a single paragraph. MDPI's layout guide says the abstract must be self-contained, with abbreviations defined in it, no reference to the bibliography or to figures, and no equations, and that citations to previously published papers are not required in abstracts.

Performance validation missing or limited to simulation only. Sensors publishes work on sensor design, signal processing, and sensing systems. Reviewers evaluate whether the proposed sensor or method is validated with real measured data, not only simulation results. Manuscripts that present simulation-based performance claims without at least a proof-of-concept experimental validation are routinely asked to include experimental evidence before review. If experimental validation is not yet possible, this should be explicitly justified.

Comparison to state-of-the-art not included in a performance table. Sensors reviewers expect a comparative performance table that situates the proposed sensor or method against existing approaches from the literature on relevant metrics: accuracy, sensitivity, power consumption, response time, cost, or specificity as appropriate. Manuscripts that claim improved performance without a tabulated head-to-head comparison are flagged for this revision. The comparison should include representative recent references, not outdated baselines.

A Sensors formatting and readiness check evaluates manuscript structure, MDPI template compliance, and experimental validation completeness against these desk-rejection patterns before you submit.

Or see example reports before you finalize.