To insure high quality BESIII papers, analyses must undergo a careful review process. Authors should understand that the process is designed to improve upon the analysis and to produce a result that is worthy of publication in an international physics journal.
Following is a brief description of the necessary steps. For more detail, see the BESIII Publication Policy. Note: at each step, authors should answer all questions raised using HyperNews and update the body of the memo to incorporate clarifications, suggested improvements, and any changes to the analysis.
Present the results of your analysis at a Physics Working Group (PWG) meeting. Use the comments received to improve the analysis.
Prepare a detailed analysis memo and upload it to the BESIII DocDB. (See Memo Preparation.)
When PWG conveners are satisfied with the memo, present the results at a Physics and Software meeting, or in a "memo approval" talk at a Physics and Software Workshop or at a BESIII collaboration meeting.
The PWG conveners and Physics Coordinator will judge whether the analysis is ready to enter the referee process, and the Physics Coordinator will appoint a Referee Committee (RC).
The RC will review the analysis and raise more questions. Authors should respond promptly.
When referees are satisfied with the analysis and memo, prepare a draft paper. (See Paper Draft) Remember to always keep the results in the memo consistent with the results in the paper!
Referees will report to the PWG conveners and Physics Coordinator when they are satisfied with the analysis and draft. The Physics Coordinator will call for Collaboration Wide Review (CWR) of the paper. The RC will review answers to questions and any modifications to the draft.
After CWR, the Physics Coordinators will ask the Publication Committee and the Spokespersons to perform a final review and to make final edits to the language. This process may raise additional questions.
After the approval of the Publication Committee and the Spokespersons, the paper draft may be submitted to the journal and to the arXiv. Whenever information about the corresponding author is required within a publication, remember to use "The BESIII Collaboration" and the common BESIII email address (firstname.lastname@example.org).
When journal referee comments are received, they should be posted on HyperNews. Authors will prepare a reply and update the paper if necessary. The reply should be posted in HyperNews, and the modified draft should be posted in the DocDB. Before resubmission, the draft and replies should be approved by at least two-thirds of the RC and the Physics Coordinator.
If and when the paper is accepted by the journal, authors should submit an updated draft to the arXiv.
Authors should supply figures and any supplementary figures to the Physics Coordinator to place on the BESIII publication page.
To release preliminary results for conferences, ask for approval from the RC.
Physics Coordinator and Spokespersons must give their approval before preliminary results can be presented.
Only one preliminary result should be presented publicly, except in special circumstances when the Physics Coordinator has determined that updating the result is in the best interest of the collaboration.
Conference talks should be posted for comments at least one week before the talk is to be presented. A practice talk should be given.
To facilitate clear and consistent conference presentations of preliminary results, authors should prepare Power Point slides (see BESIII Publication Policy ). The slides must be approved by the RC, and the Physics Coordinator will make the slides available on the BESIII preliminary publication page.
Download the Memo Preparation Files : Files
Every analysis to be considered for publication must have a detailed memo prepared in English and available to all BESIII members via DocDB. Describe clearly what was done and supply supporting numbers and plots. It should include information about the data set(s) used, software versions, selection criteria with justifications, relevant plots including data/Monte Carlo comparisons, numerical results, and interpretation. This document should be sufficiently detailed so that other BESIII members could reproduce the analysis and results.
The paper draft should be carefully prepared. Although writing in English may be difficult, this is not an excuse to write a poorly organized, sloppy paper. Applying final English polishing is not terribly difficult if the paper has been adequately prepared.
Discuss with RC the appropriate journal. Draft should use correct journal template.
Run spelling checker.
Check your paper with the Paper checklist.
Last modified: Jan., 05, 2021Prof. Fred Harris / fah AT phys.hawaii.edu Ryan Mitchell / remitche AT indiana.edu