Review Procedures
Manuscript Submissions and Editor Assignments
Authors must submit manuscripts to SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences (SIIMS) in electronic form. Hard-copy
submissions will not be considered. Authors must enter submissions
directly into the Journal Submission & Tracking System at
http://siims.siam.org. Authors should
submit both the manuscript and a cover letter in PDF format.
Note: Non-supplemental images/figures, if any, must be embedded "inline" in the manuscript.
(See Instructions for Authors at http://www.siam.org/journals/siims/authors.php for information about submitting supplementary multimedia files with
a SIIMS manuscript.)
After the submission has entered SIAM's tracking system, the
corresponding author receives an e-mail acknowledging receipt and
providing the manuscript number. Authors are asked to include the
manuscript number in all correspondence regarding the
paper.
After checking the files the author submitted, the SIAM office contacts
the EIC to let him/her know that there is a new manuscript that needs
to be routed. Note that all contact with the EIC and all subsequent
review correspondence with the Associate Editor (AE) and the SIAM
office regarding the manuscript will be done via e-mail. The EIC
briefly reviews each submission to determine whether it is appropriate
for the journal and, if so, which AE is appropriate to handle the
review. In making this decision, the EIC takes into account both the
areas of expertise and the current workloads of the editors. If the EIC
assigns the paper to an AE, (s)he does so by letting the SIAM office
know to whom the submission should be routed for review. The SIAM
office then contacts the AE to let him/her know that(s)he will be
handling the manuscript. This e-mail provides the AE a direct link to
the manuscript and the cover letter. Assuming the AE accepts the
assignment, the paper is considered in review (status R) at this point.
Note that the EIC can reject papers that are clearly inappropriate for
SIIMS without assigning them to a Review Editor.
Direct Submissions: Members of the Editorial Board occasionally receive submissions directly from authors. In such cases the editor will ask the author to resubmit the paper to the SIAM office through the Journal Submission & Tracking System at http://siims.siam.org. This procedure ensures that the SIAM office will have the opportunity to access the manuscript for proper processing and tracking throughout the review process. Editors should not review a new submission without the approval of the EIC, who assigns the Review Editor for each paper.
Papers authored by Editorial Board members: Papers authored by Editorial Board members are subject to the same anonymous peer-review process as other papers. Submissions to the journal authored by the Editor-in-Chief will be directed to the Vice President for Publications, who will oversee the review process.
Status Changes
Once the Review Editor has obtained referee reports and made a decision on a manuscript, the author receives an email informing him/her of the decision. Anonymous referee reports are generally included, along with the Associate Editor (AE) decision.
NOTE: To protect referee confidentiality, all referee reports that are sent electronically are safest as plain text, or (La)TeX source. The Journal Submission & Tracking System also allows attachment of a PDF or a PostScript file, but this is not the preferred path in terms of protecting referee identity. If an attachment is sent, the editor MUST take care to make sure that all filename header information is edited out.
The various status designations used by SIAM are discussed below. Note the distinctions among the following statuses: rejected, in revision, minor revision.
- Accepted (A). The reviewing editor generates an acceptance letter through the web-based system. This goes to the corresponding author via e-mail. In a follow-up step, SIAM staff contacts the author for TeX files to launch the production process.
- In revision (V, V1, V2, V3). When an author is asked to revise a paper, there is no guarantee that the revised paper will be accepted for publication. Usually, in fact, such revised papers must again be refereed. The editor's letter should make this clear. The author receives referee reports and an email requesting revisions. The email contains a link that the author may use to submit the revised version directly into SIAM's web-based system. Also, a deadline of no longer than six months for the revision should be stated.
- Minor revision (PA, PA1, PA2, PA3). Unlike one that is "in revision," a paper that is PA will likely be published in the journal as long as the author(s) makes the changes specified. The revision is minor; no substantial changes are necessary in order to make the paper acceptable. The author receives a decision letter and referee reports. The letter may state whether the editor intends that the revised paper will be sent back to the referees or not.
- Rejection (RJ). A paper that is of poor quality should never be transferred to another SIAM journal. The editor's letter should leave no doubt as to the status of the paper. The author receives a rejection letter and may also get referee reports.
- In review (R, R1, R2, R3). The paper is with the EIC, or with the AE who is handling the review process. Referees are usually contacted and asked to send reports.
- In Review; re-routed from one editor to another (RR). This status change can be effected only by the EIC. It occurs in one of two situations:
- an editor cannot handle a given paper due to heavy workload or other considerations and requests that the paper be re-routed to another editor. The EIC should inform the SIAM office of the change in editors, and the Publications Manager or Editorial Associate can take care of the change in editors in the web-based tracking system.
- An editor has not handled a paper in a timely or responsible fashion and the EIC determines that the paper must be re-routed to another editor.
- Withdrawn (W). An author can withdraw a paper. The editor, the SIAM office, and the EIC must be notified. A paper is also considered withdrawn when an author fails to revise a paper within a reasonable amount of time. SIAM asks authors to revise and resubmit papers within six months. The decision to close a file out is made jointly by the SIAM office and the reviewing editor or the Editor-in-Chief. Files are never closed without first giving the author ample opportunity to submit a revision.
Transfer
Papers that are of high quality but are inappropriate for the journal to which they have been submitted can be transferred to another SIAM journal for consideration. Both EICs involved and the author(s) must approve the transfer. The EICs must agree before the author(s) is consulted. If the author agrees to the transfer, the original paper is marked rejected (RJ) and a new file is opened with a different manuscript number. The submission then goes through the system to the EIC of the second journal. However, SIAM staff should first include a "General Note" on the electronic file indicating its history as a transferred paper.
Reports
Various reports can be run by SIAM staff. Selected reports are run and distributed to the journal EICs on a monthly and quarterly basis. One report shows all papers in process, while others emphasize papers that have remained in one status for an unusually long time.
The Editorial Assistant working with SIIMS sends editors an Individual Editor Report periodically. This report shows all papers assigned to that editor, and asks for status updates on all papers that have been in review for four months or longer (flagged). If a paper has gone back to an author for revision (V or PA) and the editor has not received the revision though some months have passed, the Editorial Assistant will point this out in the report and will offer to contact the author to see if the author intends to complete the revision.
It is helpful if the editors respond, within one week, to the Editorial Assistant. If possible, the editor should indicate approximately when the review will be completed. SIAM receives the greatest number of author inquiries about flagged papers and it is important that authors be reassured that the review is proceeding.
