Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
For an academic paper each publisher journal have their standards. These do not affect or are affected by the manuscripts sent in to the journal. Some journals specify fonts, commonly standard Times Roman, for their manuscripts. If the journal specifies something, follow that specification. Otherwise use a font that is easy to read.
While every science journal in our database is covered in the Science Citation Index Expanded and only those journals of relatively significantly higher citation impact are selected for the Science Citation Index. In other words, Science Citation Index covers only the most highly cited, highest impact journals in each category.
It should also be pointed out that journals like Science and Nature are both heavily slanted toward biological sciences: of the 30 editors for Science, only about five work in physical science areas. Nature is slightly more balanced, with about a 3:2 split between biological and physical science. (But then, remember "physical science" means ...
In fact, they act pretty much like a predatory journal. I checked several published or accepted articles in that particular journal: "Frontiers in Materials" and indeed it seems there is no connection between peer-reviewers background and the reviewed articles. Also, the interesting thing, which I'm not sure how to interpret, is that usually ...
If I'm reading a journal article for which the reference for example is stated as "Journal of Examples 3, 74-78 (2014)", how can I tell whether it's the volume or issue number that is given? In many circumstances, I understand that it's quite easy to tell. For example, if the number is quite high, it's probably not the issue number.
Now that it is well established, practices have developed that cement it in place, including clear distinctions between what goes in a journal and what goes in a conferences. Michael Ernst has a very nice write-up of the typical way a computer scientist thinks about conferences vs. journals .
@Lee, I can not comment on your second question, but different metrics have different ranking systems. I am also in the Computer Science field. We mainly refer to CORE ranking for conferences (e.g., A*, A, B, etc.) and best quartile for journals (e.g., Q1, Q2, etc.) –
The Chinese Computer Science Federation's rankings are, in my experience, very good. You can view an English translation of them at the PandaSearch website. Searching Google for "computer science conference rankings" will turn up several alternative ranking lists; of these, the Chinese rankings are the most stringent.
Reproducing that blog passage and calling it "the timeline in mathematics" is really misleading. These are the statistics for one journal at the end of its first year, after less than 100 submitted papers. They are not typical in any way: rather, they are very quick (and that is presumably the point of the editor of the new journal reporting them).
Web of Science (WoS) uses Journal Impact Factor Quartile the journal’s rank in category (X) is based on where the journal stands relative to the total number in the category. InCites (WoS) displays the best quartile for journals that appear in multiple Web of Science Research Areas.