Author Guidelines
After submission, your work will be checked for similarity check and adherence to the guidelines.
All co-authors receive a submission notification.
The submitting author is solely responsible for all information entered during the submission process. Please make sure you have discussed the role of all co-authors as described here.
During the review process, all co-authors can interact with the reviewers. However, only the submitting author can upload a revised version.
Research outputs can be written in collaboration and be enhanced with hyperlinks, visualisations and interactive data.
| PUBLICATION STATUS | DESCRIPTION |
|---|---|
| DRAFT | Publication is only visible to the author |
| EMBARGO | Limited to the TU Delft Community |
| PREPRINT | Visible to everyone and ready to accept reviews |
| PUBLISHED | Peer review successfully completed |
| CLOSED | This status is to be used in special cases, e.g. when there is no agreement, the review is not relevant anymore, it is not correct, ethical, etc. |
Review process
Each publishing community (e.g., a conference or thematic series) within ThES has the flexibility to define the level of openness in the peer review process. While all communities must adhere to basic principles of academic integrity and fairness, they may choose from the following review configurations:
- Open Identity Review: Reviewers and authors know each other’s identities during the review process.
- Open Reports: Reviewer comments and editorial decisions are published alongside the article, optionally including reviewer names.
- Flexible Transparency: Communities may choose one of the following options
- reviewer reports are published anonymously
- reviewer reports are published with the names of the reviewers (with consent)
- only the names of the reviewers are published, and the reports remain confidential
Each community clearly states its chosen review configuration on its publishing community page.
Submission preparation checklist
