Publication Process

This document defines the process and guidelines for publications related to Working Group activities and results.

Publications document the scientific activity of the team as a whole and of its individual members; they are a necessary requirement for the academic career, and are usually necessary to support the application for funds from public research organizations. 

 Principles   Type of publications   Process   Authors   Preprints 

 Proceedings 

Principles

The publication of papers is one of the main objectives of the Working Group, as part of its scientific activity.

A proactive attitude and a collaborative team spirit are encouraged, to achieve the best possible outcome - that is, a large number of high quality publications.

The availability of material for publication is the result of a coherent effort, involving many activities and roles in the software process; the list of authors should reflect this reality. 

Publications should provide a fair recognition of the Working Group members' activity, representing both a motivation and a reward for work.

Back to top


Types of publications

The publications associated to the Working Group activity involve general papers and specific papers.  

They are both subject to the same process, only the criterion for authorship is different.

General papers

They reflect the activity of the Working Group as a coherent team. They encompass papers on:

  • architecture
  • physics, mathematical or software models and algorithms
  • testing and physics validation
  • software process
Specific papers

They address specific topics of application or validation of Working Group software, such as, for instance:

  • development of software tools for specific applications
  • demonstration of software capabilities in a specific experimental domain
  • evaluation of performance through comparison to specific experimental data

Back to top


Process for the preparation of an article

Inception   Production   Submission   Writers   Reviews

Inception phase

Any Working Group member may propose a topic for publication; a proactive attitude in this respect is warmly encouraged. The proposal, to be submitted to the group mailing list, should suggest:

All group members are invited to contribute to the discussion about the proposed paper. If a wide agreement is reached on the topic and type of paper, the process for the preparation of a paper starts.

A writing team is nominated by the Working Group Coordinator(s), including volunteers and, if appropriate, other members invited to contribute as expert on the topic. 

Writing team

The writing team is responsible for:

The writing team defines a set of milestones for the paper, in agreement with the Working Group Coordinator, including:

and it communicates them to the whole Working Group.

Production phase

The writing team defines the internal organization of the work and the related responsibilities, according to the agreed milestones plan.

The writing team may contact other Working Group members, to request any kind of contribution needed for the preparation of the article (information, results, figures etc.); a constructive collaboration is expected from the colleagues contacted.

The drafts are regularly made available in the CVS papers repository.
New directories in the repository are created in consultation with the repository manager (Gabriele Cosmo).

Internal reviews

The drafts corresponding to milestone deliverables are subject to review

The writing team informs the Working Group about the availability of a CVS tag of the draft for review.
It is recommended to allow one week at least for conveying comments and suggestions; the writing team may specify a different lapse of time for the review.

All Working Group members are invited to contribute to the review process; they may send their comments directly to the writing team, or to the whole group mailing list.

The writing team is responsible for editing the draft, taking into account the suggestions received.

Submission phase

The writing team informs the Working Group when a final draft is available, according to the agreed milestone plan. 
After a final review, the draft is submitted to the selected journal, in agreement with the Working Group Coordinator(s).
A member of the writing team, designated by the team itself, acts as corresponding author.

The corresponding author keeps the Working Group regularly informed about the interaction with the publisher and the referees.

The writing team makes any updates to the original draft available in the CVS repository.
If major modifications are requested by the referees,  an iteration as in the production phase is performed, including an internal review of the revised draft.

Back to top


Authors

General papers are signed by all the active Working Group members.

Specific papers are signed by the Working Group members directly involved in the associated projects (taking into account all the related activities of the software process).

The proposed list of authors is compiled by the Working Group Coordinator(s) in the inception phase of the publication process, in consultation with the writing team, and submitted to the Working Group mailing list for discussion.
Any proposal of  modification to the initial list should be supported by objective documentation of activity.
A wide agreement in the definition of the authors of a paper is desirable; if consensus is not reached, the Working Group Coordinator(s) is responsible for the final definition of authors.
The author list should be defined by the time of the first milestone.

In exceptional cases, changes to the defined author list may be proposed after the completion of the first milestone, with the support of adequate justification; they should be agreed with the Working Group Coordinator(s).

Undergraduate students and technical staff may be included as authors at the discretion of their supervisor or group leader respectively; such special cases should be discussed with the Working Group Coordinator(s) in the inception phase.

The authors are listed in alphabetical order in all the publications associated to the Working Group activities.

Back to top


Definition of "active Working Group members"

Active members contribute regularly to the Working Group with agreed responsibilities in at least two domains, among software process disciplines and development of physics/mathematical models.

The activity is objectively documented through software process deliverables associated to public releases.

The active member status is acquired by contributing software process deliverables to a Geant4 public release. 
Once acquired, the active member status is maintained by contributing software process deliverables to all following public releases. 

The requirement of deliverables for a public release may be relaxed in special cases for Conference Proceedings, at the discretion of the Working Group Coordinator, provided evidence for contribution to software process deliverables exists.
Temporary justified exceptions may be agreed with the Working Group Coordinator(s) in special cases (such as, for instance, a period of sabbatical leave).

To be eligible for the status of active membership, the contribution to software process deliverables should be the result of agreed responsibilities (i.e. not an occasional event). 

Back to top


Preprints

Preprints should be issued for all the publications submitted to journals.

The time of issuing a preprint - when submitting the article to a journal or at the time of acceptance for publication - is agreed with the Working Group Coordinator(s).

The preprint publishing organization (e.g. Laboratory, University, National Institute etc.) is selected in agreement with the Working Group Coordinator(s). 

The writing team is responsible for:

Back to top


Conference proceedings

Contributions to Conference Proceedings are prepared by the speaker. 

They should be made available to the Working Group for internal review at least one week prior to the deadline for submission. The drafts are handled in CVS as in the case of journal articles.

The same guidelines about authorship apply to contributions to Conference Proceedings as well, unless the Conference Organization adopts a different policy. In the case when one author name is allowed only (because of the conference policy or very limited page allocation), it should appear as "on behalf of [Geant4 group name]".

The issue of preprints out of contributions to Conference Proceedings is encouraged, and is required when the publication of the Conference Proceedings requires a copyright transfer to a publisher. 

The speaker is responsible for all the operations concerning the preparation of a preprint and for posting it on the Working Group web.

Back to top


Validity terms of this document

The procedures and guidelines described in this document are effective starting on 1st January 2003.

As to publications in progress at the time of issuing this document, the same guidelines for the preparation process apply, according to the appropriate current stage. The list of authors is agreed between the current writing team and the Working Group Coordinator; the same guidelines concerning the authorship apply too, while the definition of active members should reflect the situation at the time of the inception phase of the paper.

Back to top


Evolution of this document and arbitration

The Working Group Coordinator(s) is responsible for the maintenance of this document and its availability to the Working Group members.
Any change to the publication process described in this document should result from a wide consensus in the Working Group and agreed with the Coordinator(s).

Specific issues concerning these publication guidelines should be discussed with the Working Group Coordinator(s). In the extreme case of serious disagreement with these guidelines, the arbitration of Geant4 Technical Steering Board may be requested.

Back to top

Revision History

3 Jan 2002 MGP First version, resulting from discussions on the mailing list and with individual Working Group members

 


Last modified 18 May, 2003 - Maria Grazia Pia