Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • NT Instructions To Reviewers

    Uploaded by

    Mohamed Krar
    28 views1 page
    This document provides instructions for reviewers on evaluating manuscripts submitted to the Nuclear Technology journal. Reviewers are asked to consider whether the manuscript makes an original contribution, whether the title and abstract are consistent with the text, and whether the conclusions are clear and supported. Reviewers are also asked to check that prior work in the field is properly cited and to recommend whether the manuscript should be published as is, with revisions, or rejected. The instructions provide additional guidance on the review process and standards for publication.

    Original Description:

    NT Instructions to Reviewers

    Original Title

    NT Instructions to Reviewers

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document provides instructions for reviewers on evaluating manuscripts submitted to the Nuclear Technology journal. Reviewers are asked to consider whether the manuscript makes an original contribution, whether the title and abstract are consistent with the text, and whether the conclusions are clear and supported. Reviewers are also asked to check that prior work in the field is properly cited and to recommend whether the manuscript should be published as is, with revisions, or rejected. The instructions provide additional guidance on the review process and standards for publication.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    28 views1 page

    NT Instructions To Reviewers

    Uploaded by

    Mohamed Krar
    This document provides instructions for reviewers on evaluating manuscripts submitted to the Nuclear Technology journal. Reviewers are asked to consider whether the manuscript makes an original contribution, whether the title and abstract are consistent with the text, and whether the conclusions are clear and supported. Reviewers are also asked to check that prior work in the field is properly cited and to recommend whether the manuscript should be published as is, with revisions, or rejected. The instructions provide additional guidance on the review process and standards for publication.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    Nuclear Technology

    Instructions to Reviewers
    When reviewing the manuscript, please consider the following questions:
    1.

    Is this an original contribution? Is new and important information presented?

    2.

    Are the title and, particularly, the abstract consistent with the text?

    3.

    Is the manuscript correct and complete?

    4.

    Is the subject presented clearly? Are the conclusions clear and consistent with the work done?

    5.

    Does it give adequate credit to earlier work in the field? If no, please identify omitted work, if
    possible, by indicating specific references.

    6.

    Your recommendation:
    a. Publication as is
    b. Publication after minor revision following comments provided
    c. Publication after major revision following comments provided
    d. Rejection

    7.

    Should it be published as: (a) technical paper, or


    (b) technical note()?

    Comments:
    1.

    A reviewer is not expected to edit the manuscript. The copy editors will perform that task.
    However, comments as to whether the writing is unacceptable or a sentence or paragraph
    does not make sense are acceptable and appreciated.

    2.

    Please remember that THE COPY EDITORS WILL NOT CORRECT UNITS . All American Nuclear
    Society publications require the use of SI units; if the author(s) used non-SI or mixed units
    please state this in your review.

    3.

    It is not necessary to return the manuscript. Return it only if you choose to provide your
    comments on the manuscript. In such a case, please do so in a manner that identifies your
    comments clearly and readably. (A RED - OR BLUE - FINE TIPPED MARKER, OR PEN IS HIGHLY
    RECOMMENDED.)

    4.

    Papers that have appeared in other refereed journal are not acceptable for publication.

    5.

    Papers that have appeared in proceedings or other meetings may be considered for
    publication.

    ()

    In a technical note authors may present preliminary results of work in


    progress or extension/refinement of results already published; work on
    subjects of limited interest to NT readers may also appear as a technical
    note. A note may also summarize information presented fully elsewhere,
    e.g., a lab report or the proceeding of a meeting.
    Revised 2008

    You might also like