A large duplication of another author's or one's own work is a sign of poor scholarship. There is also a copyright issue if the source is not cited. Your manuscript must provide proper citations, use quotation marks or indentation (for quotations of five or more lines) to indicate borrowed wording, and minimize duplication. Failure to do so is grounds for rejection. Learn more.
Expectations of Referees
While preparing your manuscript for submission, authors are encouraged to review the Instructions for Referees
. Referees provide their reviews as a service to the field, and the journal is grateful for their feedback. Referees are asked to provide a professional opinion on a paper, both a recommendation (reject, major revision, minor revision, accept) as well as an evaluation of the overall significance that balances the depth of the contribution and the breadth of the overall impact (not appropriate, marginal, topical, major, landmark). Referees are expected to read the paper with sufficient care to be confident that it is mathematically sound; however, the author has final responsibility for the correctness of the content and the referees are not required to check every detail.
With the exception of those works indicated clearly in both a cover letter and a footnote on the first page of the paper, the content of the manuscript, in whole or in part, cannot be submitted, accepted, or published elsewhere, including conference proceedings. Significant extensions of prior conference proceedings articles will be considered, but these will be judged primarily on the new material. This policy does not prohibit posting the manuscript on a preprint server or releasing it as a technical report. Submission of a manuscript to SIMODS is representation by the author that the manuscript has not been published or submitted simultaneously for publication elsewhere. If there is any possibility of a question around whether or not a work is overlapping, then it should be noted in the cover letter. If the potentially overlapping work is not yet publicly available, then a copy should be included for reference by the editors and referees.
Additional Clarification on Extensions to Conference Proceedings Articles
As mentioned above, SIMODS will consider significant extensions to conference proceedings papers. Published workshop papers are also included in this class. Submission of an extension of a paper that is under review for a conference is only allowed if the conference explicitly allows for this. These papers are judged primarily on new material and should also provide a fresh perspective on the previous work. Though every case is different, examples of probable unsatisfactory extensions would be submissions that are limited to the addition of proofs, extra background material and references, and/or minor extensions of theory or experimental results.
Additionally, we have the following expectations for an extension of a conference proceedings paper:
- A differentiated title, so that the two versions can be distinguished.
- Minimal textual overlap, especially in the abstract and introduction which should be recast for the SIMODS readership.
- A footnote to the title that says "This work is an extension of [cite prior work here]."
- Both the cover letter and the manuscript should precisely explain what is novel in the extension.
- Indication in the cover letter that the work is an extension as well as the venue and the status of the conference proceedings article (submitted/accepted/published). For concurrent submission, the cover letter should also include a link to the conference policy that allows for concurrent submission.
- A copy of the conference proceedings article/submission to be shared with the handling editors and referees. (If a submission is shared, then the final accepted version must also be shared as soon as it is available.)
Submission Length Guidelines
Papers should be written for a broad data science audience but also be relatively brief, i.e., approximately 20 pages of text. To facilitate this, we recommend that authors put details for experimental reproducibility or meticulous proofs into supplemental materials, which are not refereed nor subject to page limits. To ensure consistency in this policy, we will enforce the following guidelines on any submissions or revisions after January 1, 2021:
- Submissions must be under 700 lines (800 lines for revisions) or 20 pages (whichever is more), including appendices but not including references or supplemental materials.
- Submissions (or revisions) must be under 30 pages in total, including all figures, tables, references, and appendices, but not including the supplement.
- In order to properly assess the length, we recommend to use SIAM LaTeX Multimedia format (i.e., siamonline190516.cls) with no modifications that would impact the length assessment, e.g., to the margins or fonts. If the SIAM format is not used, please be advised to use at least 10pt font and set the margins so that the text width and height are no more than 6in and 8in, respectively.
Exceptions to these policies may be requested. Such exceptions will result in additional handling/review time and require the approval of the EIC and other editors
Exceptions to these policies may be requested. Such exceptions will result in additional handling/review time and require the approval of the EIC and other editors.
Potentially Offensive Material
There is no general rule on what material is appropriate for publication in SIAM publications. However, if an editor believes that the use of some material (text, images, etc.) may offend SIAM readers, there will be an exchange with the authors on the need for the particular material and whether alternatives can be identified to express the same results. Unless the authors can make convincing arguments that the particular material is essential to convey the scientific contribution, it is expected that the material be replaced prior to review and further consideration for publication. For example, the "Lena image" has been used in past publications on imaging but is inconsistent with efforts to promote inclusion in mathematics, science, and engineering. SIAM will not consider submissions containing this image.
A resubmission of a manuscript previously rejected by this or another SIAM journal will be treated as a new submission, with the history of the manuscript made available to the handling editor and, if necessary, also referees. The cover letter should include a full response to the previous referee reports including a detailed description of how the manuscript has been revised to meet all the criticism of the original submission. As a new submission, there is no guarantee that it will be handled by the same editor or that the original referees will be involved in the evaluation.
If your paper contains material (for example, tables or figures) from another source, that material must be accompanied by written permission from the copyright holder. Permission is needed in cases of alterations to the original, as well. To assist referees, unpublished references can also be submitted with an indication of whether they have been accepted for publication.
Conflicts of Interest
It is vital to the field, as well as to the reputation of SIAM and its journals, that conflicts of interest be avoided. For any paper assigned to them, both editors and referees are required to declare any conflict of interest or even the appearance of one. This includes handling/refereeing papers authored by friends, colleagues, coworkers, and current or recent students or postdocs. Editors will do their utmost to avoid assigning papers that would present a conflict of interest, but self-reporting is also mandated due to the difficulty of tracking all affiliations of authors, referees, and editors. If there is a conflict of interest, it is SIAM policy that the manuscript be assigned to a different editor/referee. If there is an appearance of a conflict of interest but no actual conflict, then the situation should be referred to the editor-in-chief or the SIAM office for a final decision on how to proceed.
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 members of the editorial board 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.
All manuscripts are submitted in confidence. Referees should not divulge the contents of the paper unless it is available as a publicly available preprint. Even in those cases, it should not be divulged that the paper has been submitted to the journal. A referee may request the permission of the editor to discuss the paper with others in certain cases, e.g., a professor may ask to share a paper with a Ph.D. student who would assist in a review or vice versa.