Robotics and Autonomous Systems - Elsevier

SiteStat.jsp

ROBOTICS AND AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS

Now affiliated with the Intelligent Autonomous Systems (IAS) Society Peer Review Policy for Robotics and Autonomous Systems The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of Robotics and Autonomous Systems and all manuscripts are reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Initial manuscript evaluation The Editor¹ first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least two experts for review. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed approximately within two weeks of receipt. Type of Peer Review Robotics and Autonomous Systems employs single blind review, in which referees remain anonymous for the author throughout the process. How the referee is selected Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated. We request suggestions of referees from the author, though these recommendations are not necessarily used. Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: Is original Is methodologically sound Follows appropriate ethical guidelines Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions Correctly cites earlier relevant work Language correction is not part of the peer review process but referees may, is they so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of referees. However, the typical time for Robotics and Autonomous Systems is presently 10 weeks. Should the referees' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee's report has thoroughly convinced the Editor, decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee's report. The Editor's decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript. Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees. Editor's Decision is final Referees advise the Editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Becoming a referee for Robotics and Autonomous Systems The benefits of refereeing for Robotics and Autonomous Systems include the opportunity to read and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. If you are not currently a referee for Robotics and Autonomous Systems, but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact one of the Editors (see contact details at www.elsevier.com/locate/robot). ¹ Throughout the document "Editor" can be read as "Editor in Chief" as well as "Regional Editor"

Robotics and Autonomous Systems