Submission Workflow

Paper sources

The journal receives papers from two channels. Firstly, those highly rated papers (10-20%) recommended from one of the GPPS technical conferences; secondly, research papers submitted independently of a GPPS event. In both cases, the papers undergo an extensive review process aimed at maintaining the high standards of the GPPS journal.

Initial manuscript submission

Authors are asked to submit a PDF file of their paper in the journal submission system. For a direct submission, please prepare your manuscript using the GPPS journal MS Word or LaTex manuscript templates. For a GPPS conference paper recommended for the journal publication, the initial submission can be made simply with the PDF file of the original conference paper (or an updated version in the conference paper template with all changes marked up in color).

All submissions initially undergo a plagiarism check using iThenticate to ensure they are original. After this initial check, the manuscript is passed on to the Editor-in-Chief.

Peer review

We operate a single-blind review system: reviewers are anonymous to the authors at all times. A minimum of three reviewers evaluates original research and review articles. For other article types, the number of reviewers assigned is at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

Manuscripts that have been conference peer-reviewed

Papers that have been recommended for publication following presentation at a GPPS technical conference can be directly accepted for publication by the Editor-in-Chief after an assessment of the paper and conference reviews. In rare cases, minor modifications may be requested by the Editor-in-Chief prior to acceptance.

Authors of papers that have been presented at a peer-reviewed GPPS technical conference but not have been recommended for publication must submit a revised manuscript, a marked-up copy of the manuscript showing the changes that have been made in response to the reviewer’s comments, and a detailed rebuttal of those comments. The Editor-in-Chief may then choose to accept the paper, request additional minor modifications, reject the paper, or request an Associate Editor to examine the case in more detail.

In the latter case, the Associate Editor may make a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief or request additional reviews or revisions before making a recommendation at his/her discretion. The Editor-in-Chief will make a final decision to accept or reject the paper.

If the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor requests a revised manuscript, it should be submitted within six weeks. The revised manuscript should be accompanied by a point-by-point response to the peer review comments and a marked-up copy of the manuscript showing the changes made.

Manuscripts that require peer review

For papers submitted directly to the journal, the Editor-in-Chief will assign an Associate Editor providing that the manuscript is appropriate for the journal and is of a suitable standard.

The Associate Editor is responsible for inviting reviewers (the Editor-in-Chief may also invite reviewers when appropriate). The Associate Editor and the Editor-in-Chief are required to declare any competing interest that may influence their evaluation of the manuscript and, where appropriate, recuse themselves. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and the absence of competing interests with the authors or the manuscript. The authors may suggest reviewers for their articles during submission. They should ensure the suggested reviewers have no conflict of interest. The Editor-in-Chief will check the suggested reviewers’ suitability and may invite them at his/her discretion.

Upon receiving all the required reviews, the Associate Editor makes one of the following initial recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief: accept, request minor or major revisions, or reject. The Associate Editor will notify the authors in cases where revisions are requested.

If revisions are requested, every effort will be made to help authors to understand and address the reviewers’ and editor’s comments. In particular, authors can contact the Associate Editor or the Editor-in-Chief during revision if they need some points to be clarified or want to check they are going in the right direction.

The authors are requested to submit their revised manuscript within six weeks of receiving the initial decision letter. The revision should include a point-by-point response to the peer review comments and a marked-up copy of the manuscript showing the changes made.

Revised manuscripts are evaluated by the Associate Editor, with or without the reviewers’ assistance, at his/her discretion. The manuscript may be accepted or rejected at this stage, or further revisions may be requested.

Initial paper acceptance

Once the review process is completed, the Editor-in-Chief will decide to reject or accept the paper initially. If the paper is initially accepted, authors have to upload all the supporting files (high-resolution figures, tables, employer licenses (if needed), permission to reuse copyrighted material), and the final version of their manuscript both in Word OR LaTex AND as a PDF file. For the final manuscript, the journal MS Word or LaTex templates must be used.

Final paper acceptance

All submitted files undergo an in-house editorial check to ensure they meet our requirements for format, style, and language. Submissions that do not fully comply with our author guidelines may be sent back to the authors for amendment. Once requested files are complete and comply with our editorial requirements, the Editor-in-Chief will make the decision on the final acceptance and notify the corresponding author accordingly.

Production

Accepted manuscripts are passed on to our production department for copyediting, typesetting, and publication. Authors will receive a copyedited version of their paper, which they are required to approve or correct. They may also need to address author queries if any. After the copyediting is complete, proofs are sent out within five to ten working days. Authors are requested to submit their corrections within five working days.

Article processing charge

We make no charge for the processing of papers.

Appeals

Authors who deem that an unfair and inappropriate decision has been made on their manuscript can appeal to the publisher by contacting the Editor-in-Chief. At his/her discretion, the Editor-in-Chief may appoint a new Associate Editor and/or reviewers to adjudicate.

Manuscript status

Authors can track their manuscript in their author centre on our online platform at http://www.editorialsystem.com/JGPPS/. The corresponding author will be notified by email when initial checks  and review decisions have been made.