Instructions for Referees

The SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing (SISC) depends heavily on our referees, and we are greatly indebted for maintaining the quality and timeliness of our journal. Thank you for your help in assessing manuscripts.

Editorial Policy

The purpose of the SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing is to foster the advancement of computational techniques for the solution of large-scale problems arising in scientific computation. Apart from quality, the principal criterion for acceptance of a paper is its relevance to the development and implementation of the computational methods needed to solve such problems.

Papers should be written so that they are accessible and of interest to a wide variety of readers in scientific computation and should address new computational algorithms and techniques. Papers describing novel computational solutions to problems motivated by statistical considerations and/or computational solutions to problems arising from experimental and observational data are encouraged. Papers of a theoretical nature are appropriate, provided that relevance to applications in science and engineering is demonstrated, and computational results illustrate the effectiveness of new algorithms. Papers on applications are desirable if their thrust is to illuminate the methods used or to develop new computational methods; papers should contain enough information about the application to orient other computational scientists but should avoid details of interest only to the applications specialist. Papers addressing high-performance aspects of scientific computation are particularly encouraged, provided they are numerically useful. However, papers that have a significant architectural content are acceptable only if they are clearly useful to the reader in developing new computational techniques or if they shed light on the scope and limitations of the theory involved. Papers describing mathematical software may be appropriate, but only if they introduce new algorithms or make substantial improvements in existing algorithms.

Due to space limitations, articles should usually occupy no more than approximately 20 journal pages. This limit can be exceeded; however, substantial deviation from the limit requires that the referees, editor, and editor-in-chief be convinced that a longer paper is required.

In general, papers that have appeared in conference proceedings will not be considered unless significantly revised. If a paper has appeared previously, in any form, authors must clearly indicate this in both their cover letter and in a footnote on the first page of the paper.

The editors of the SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing wish to make this journal an exciting resource in which to find useful research and experience in scientific computing. In publishing the journal, they desire to help those who need to find better ways to solve problems computationally and to develop effective new computational methods.

Review Process

The manuscript submission and peer review process is broken down into the following steps:

1. The Author submits a manuscript.
2. The Editor-in-Chief assigns an Associate Editor to act as Reviewing Editor for the paper.
3. The Associate Editor assigns Referees.
4. The Referees review the manuscript and send reports.
5. The Associate Editor makes a decision and the author is contacted.

Navigating the System

All SISC papers go through review in the web-based Journal Submission & Tracking System: http://peerreview.siam.org/.

When invited to serve as a referee there are two ways to gain access to the manuscript.

1. You'll receive an e-mail with basic information about the paper, and a link to view the manuscript. When you use the link to gain access to the web-based system and to see the paper, you are presented with a link to accept the assignment, and a link to decline the assignment.
   
   Accept referee assignment: If you accept you will be able to enter your review of the manuscript in the web-based system when you are ready.
   Decline referee assignment: If you are unable to review this manuscript and must decline we appreciate any suggestions of potential referees. You can suggest other reviewers or offer any observation on the paper by e-mailing sisc@siam.org. You can also enter your observations or suggest other referees directly into the system after you click the decline link.
2. You can alternately access your files by logging into the system through http://sisc.siam.org. using your user name and password. You are then taken to your "Home" page. It will have different categories of tasks. If you are required to perform a pending action item, there will be a red arrow next to a manuscript link. After clicking on this link, you will be presented with a "Manuscript" screen containing:
   • Information about the specific manuscript
   • A link to see the manuscript
   • Links to Accept/Decline to serve as a referee
   • A link to contact journal staff

If you accept the referee invitation, you'll also gain access to links to "check status" and "Review Manuscript."
If there are no red arrows visible on the "Home" page, then there is no pending work.

Review Manuscript

Once in the system you will be presented with a " Manuscript" screen. At the bottom of this screen under " Manuscript Tasks" is a " Review Manuscript" link. Clicking on this link displays the "Review Manuscript" screen. This screen asks for a recommendation and for a report.*
* Note that in giving a recommendation, along with a free-form text box that allows you to copy and paste a report and /or comments, you must:

Select from a drop-down menu. This manuscript is:

• Excellent;
• Good;
• Fair;
• Poor;
• Not appropriate for the journal.

Select from a drop-down menu. I recommend:

• Reject outright;
• Return to the author for major revisions, outlined in comments;
• Publish after minor revisions, outlined in comments; or
• Publish as is.

The free-form text box for your report follows.

There is also a text box available if you wish to include a private message to the Review Editor. Comments entered here are not meant to be seen by the author(s).

Finally, a manuscript evaluation form is available, but the use of this is optional.

If you prefer to work offline, you may find it faster and easier to download and print the manuscript, draft your review remarks in plain text, and copy and paste into the referee remarks text area on this screen. Again, the manuscript evaluation form is optional; the drop-down recommendations and report are required.

NOTE: As a referee, you have the option of attaching a file to deliver your report. It is recommended, however, that you instead use the text box on the Referee Recommendation Screen to type or paste plain text or TeX code. File attachments are not recommended, as referee confidentiality may be compromised. However, if you must send an attachment know that it may be forwarded to the author by the Reviewing Editor, so please be sure to first edit the file for profile information that—if left in place—could disclose your identity as the owner/creator.

Getting Help

If you need additional help, you can click on the help signs throughout the system. A help dialog will pop up with context sensitive help. You can also e-mail sisc@siam.org if you need assistance.

Manuscript Status

To get the status of your assigned manuscript(s):

1. Log into the system with your password.
2. Click on the link represented by the manuscript tracking number and abbreviated title.
3. Click on the "Check Status" link at the bottom of the displayed page.

This procedure displays detailed tracking information on the progress of the submission and review.

NOTE: Author rights to unpublished manuscripts:

All manuscripts are privileged documents; an author retains the right to the unpublished work. A referee should not use results or ideas obtained exclusively through the refereeing process in his or her own research.