Skip to main content
Submission intelligencePilot v1.0

Journal requirements, compared at the point where they change your submission.

Author instructions are not interchangeable. This pilot identifies the requirement that most changes the submission package for six journals, then shows the official source, evidence status, and date checked.

This is a maintained pilot, not a complete directory. Always recheck the live publisher instructions before submission.

Coverage snapshotReviewed 26 Aug 2026
6journals
5publishers
6requirement types
5/6fully accessible official pages
Physical Review X
Global Change Biology
Nature Energy
ACM Computing Surveys
Heliyon
Mechanics of Materials
observed in pilot not the featured difference

Use the observatory to spot the submission-specific delta.Then use the full guide for context and the publisher page as the final administrative source of truth.

Explore the pilot

Compare the requirement that changes the package

Download pilot CSV

Search by journal, publisher, field, or requirement. The requirement text summarizes the cited publisher page; the type labels are Manusights classifications added for comparison.

6 journals shown
PhysicsVerified

Physical Review X

American Physical Society

Summary for non-specialistsData statement

Prepare the PRX nontechnical Popular Summary and provide the research-data availability details required by Physical Review journals.

Checked against the PRX information-for-authors page.

Source reviewed
Ecology & climateVerified

Global Change Biology

Wiley

Data statement

Include a data availability statement; the journal says it will cover Dryad archiving charges for published papers when authors use Dryad.

Checked against the journal author-guidelines page.

Source reviewed
Energy researchVerified

Nature Energy

Springer Nature

Submission routeArticle structure

Primary research manuscripts cannot use a presubmission enquiry; choose the correct content type and follow its separate formatting instructions.

Checked against the journal submission-guidelines collection.

Source reviewed
ComputingRecheck advised

ACM Computing Surveys

Association for Computing Machinery

Article structure

The submission must be a survey or tutorial with an original organizing structure rather than a chronological literature catalog; use ACM's review-submission format.

The official author-guidelines page was checked, but automated access was incomplete; verify the live page again before submission.

Source reviewed
MultidisciplinaryVerified

Heliyon

Elsevier

Scope routing

Choose the correct disciplinary section and confirm that the work fits Heliyon's scientific scope; arts humanities and law are routed elsewhere.

Checked against the official journal page and its disciplinary routing.

Source reviewed
Materials scienceVerified

Mechanics of Materials

Elsevier

HighlightsData statement

Submit 3–5 highlights of no more than 85 characters each and a required data availability statement under Elsevier's Option C instructions.

Checked against the journal Guide for Authors.

Source reviewed

Evidence contract

Built to be checked, corrected, and cited

The value is not the row count. It is the visible chain from an author’s decision to the publisher evidence behind it. We publish the uncertainty when a source cannot be fully accessed.

01

Start with the official page

We record the journal or publisher page that governs the requirement, not a third-party summary.

02

Find the package-changing detail

We isolate the instruction that changes what an author prepares, selects, declares, or submits.

03

Keep provenance visible

Every record carries its source, review date, evidence status, and canonical Manusights guide.

What this can answer

Three decisions the dataset supports

Before drafting files

What extra artifact does this journal expect?

Surface a popular summary, highlights file, data statement, or journal-specific structure before the upload begins.

Before choosing a route

Is there a journal-specific submission constraint?

Catch content-type, disciplinary-section, or presubmission restrictions that a generic checklist misses.

Before final review

Which source should settle a contradiction?

Go directly to the current publisher page instead of relying on an undated blog or a sibling journal’s rules.

Continue the workflow

Check the manuscript, not only the upload package.

Once the administrative requirements are clear, use the Free Readiness Scan to find evidence, fit, and presentation risks that can still stop the paper before peer review.

Check my readiness