Standards for publishing in AADM and publishing policy

From AADM's Editors: the kind of papers we publish

  • Applicable. The topic and the results of the paper should be at least potentially applicable. The Editors reserve the right to give priority to articles in which applications are documented.

  • Mathematics. The paper must address mathematical problems, with an advance in mathematical methods as the main contribution. We do not publish papers that are focused on applications without a clear mathematical contribution.

  • Motivation. The subject of the paper should be properly motivated, and its significance should normally be demonstrated by a short review of previous research. Any introduction of a new technique, method, definition etc. should be justified. For example, if a new method is introduced, arguments for its advantage over standard methods should be presented.

  • Length and completeness. As a rule, we do not publish short notes or work in progress. The paper should be essentially complete, with no obvious extensions omitted.

  • Relation to previous work. It is expected that authors are familiar with the state of the art in the topic of their paper. This should be reflected in the list of references, as well as in the body of the paper.

  • Substance. We do not accept incremental improvements of a previously published work with the same or different authors. Obvious generalizations or straightforward improvements to standard methods are unlikely to be accepted.

  • Similarity to other works. Upon receipt, each submission is screened for its similarity to previously published (or accepted) papers by the same author(s) or others, whether or not these papers are cited as references. Submissions with an unacceptable degree of similarity with other work(s) will not be published, and the Editors reserve the right to notify interested parties in these circumstances.

  • Referees. When we receive a submission, it is first reviewed brifley by the Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board. The paper can be rejected at this stage if it is written carelessly or in a non-acceptable style, if it is out of the current scope of AADM, or if it does not satisfy the criteria listed above. Otherwise, at least two referees will normally be invited to provide written evaluations of the article. The policy of AADM is to ask the most competent people in the relevant field to review each submission. The authors can help by suggesting potential referees (as an answer to a question in the online submission system) but we will not invite them if there are more appropriate reviewers available.

  • Submissions that have been rejected elsewhere. The number of highly competent referees for a particular topic is limited, and so there is a possibility that a paper will be considered by a referee who reviewed the same submission for a different journal. If an author wants to make a case, the best strategy is to give the name(s) of the journal(s) where the paper has been rejected, and to send us the reports. In this way, the author can increase the chance of acceptance and possibly reduce the waiting time.

  • Survey papers. As a rule, AADM publishes original results, but exceptionally we consider surveys in certain rapidly growing topics. It is advisable to contact the Editor-in-Chief before submitting a survey.