Review Procedures

  1. Manuscript Submissions. Authors must submit manuscripts to SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis (SIMA) in electronic form. Hard-copy submissions will not be considered. Authors must enter submissions directly into the Journal Submission & Tracking System at http://sima.siam.org. Authors should submit both the manuscript and a cover letter in PDF format.
    Note: Figures, if any, must be embedded "inline" in the 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. The EIC reviews each submission to determine whether it is appropriate for the journal and, if so, Corresponding Editor will be assigned. The Corresponding Editor may select an Associate Editor to handle the review.  At this point the paper is considered in review (status R). Note that the EIC or the Corresponding Editor can reject papers that are clearly inappropriate for SIMA without assigning them to a Review Editor.

    In cases of a full review the Review Editor contacts referees who provide reports. The Review Editor makes a recommendation to the Corresponding Editor. The CE finalizes a decision and the author is contacted.

    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://sima.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.

    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 a Corresponding Editor will be directed to the Editor-in-Chief, who will coordinate the review. 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.


  2. Status Changes. Once the Review Editor has obtained referee reports and made a recommendation on the manuscript it returns to the Corresponding Editor for a decision. The author receives an email from the CE.  The anonymous referee reports are generally included, along with the AE report to the CE.

    The various status designations used by SIAM are discussed below. Note the distinctions among the following statuses: rejected, in revision, accepted pending minor revision.

    Acceptance (A). The Corresponding 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). 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 often must again be refereed. The editor's letter should make this clear.

    The author receives referee reports as part of the CE’s e-mail requesting revisions. The e-mail 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 three months for the revision should be stated.

    Accepted pending minor revision (PA). Unlike one that is "in revision," a paper that is PA is more likely to be accepted, as long as the author(s) makes the changes specified but there is no promise and the editor may still reject it. The revision is minor; no major 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, the CE, or 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 occurs in one of two situations:

    1. 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 or CE should inform the SIAM office of the change in editors.
    2. 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 AE, CE,  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. SIMA asks authors to revise and resubmit papers within three months. The decision to close a file out is made jointly by the SIAM office, the CE, AE, and the EIC.  Files are never closed without first giving the author ample opportunity to submit a revision.

  3. Transfer. Papers that are of high quality but are inappropriate for SIMA 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.

  4. Reports. Various reports can be run by SIAM staff. Selected reports are run and distributed to the EIC 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 Senior Publications Coordinator working with SIMA sends editors an Individual Editor Report every three months. This report shows all papers assigned to that editor, and asks for status updates on all papers that have been in review for six 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 three months have passed, the Publications Coordinator 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 Senior Publications Coordinator. 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.

    SIAM also sends a separate report to editors specifying flagged papers.

Renew SIAM · Contact Us · Site Map · Join SIAM · My Account
Facebook Twitter Youtube