Original research contributions and in depth surveys from all areas of computer
science are welcome.
Submissions are only be dealt with if
- the paper is formatted according to
the J.UCS guide lines
- after we have received a copyright transfer statement for the
paper. You can either upload an electronic version
of the copyright
transfer statement via web together with your paper or you can fax
us the signed copyright transfer
statement to +43 316 873 5699
- pre-publication on such sites as ArXiv is not allowed, i.e. submissions of articles which have been
pre-published on e.g. ArXiv are not accepted.
The copyright transfer statement can be downloaded from
The submission is sent to the members of the J.UCS editorial board.
least three reviewers sign up for a review of the paper, the
submission is accepted. The authors are notified about the status of their
submission within approximately 4 weeks. If we fail to find the required number of
reviewers, the submission is withdrawn and the authors are
free to submit their
paper to another journal of their choice.
Authors of submitted papers give an explicit permission to plagiarism check of their submitted (and accepted) articles.
Duration of review process
The duration of the evaluation process depends entirely on the quality of the submission. From past experience, excellent and innovative papers written in flawless
English in an area that is mainstream can pass the evaluation process in less than 4 months. However, if the reviewers demand a revision and hence the authors have
to send an improved version followed by a second round of reviews, the evaluation time may be easily twice as much.
Categories of papers:
(a) Research contributions: This is the rule, and the majority of papers will be in this area. Papers should be accepted only if they
contain innovative results. The length of the paper must also be taken into account. A short paper is acceptable with fewer innovative results
than a longer paper.
Research contributions should not be combined with more "survey type" material than is necessary for the paper. Note that
contribution can be reports of projects, if the project has resulted in sufficiently many clearly stated innovations or new results.
(b) Notes: Short research contributions with usually a single but interesting new idea, result or innovation.
(c) Surveys: Usually longer papers, do usually not contain any or much original research but are judged on whether they are well
and give an unbiased and complete survey of the topic at issue.
(d) Papers on J.UCS: These are papers that explain improvements or changes in J.UCS. In this case they may or may not contain novel
material. They should
be judged on whether they are well-written and understandable and whether the innovative features and changes in
J.UCS -something one can usually try out and test- are indeed of interest to at least some parts of the J.UCS community.
The submissions are evaluated according to the following criteria:
- Accept as is.
A few lines why the paper is accepted are optional and are forwarded to the authors.
- Accept with minor revisions. A review of the revised version is not necessary.
The reviewer lists minor modifications such as corrections
of typos, missing references, etc.
- A major revision of the paper is required. The revised version will be reviewed
by at least
one reviewer of the original version.
The reviewer lists the proposed changes.
The reviewer states the reasons for
the rejection of the paper.
- The reviewer evaluates the scientific contribution or other general merits of the submission
(depending on the
category of the paper) on a scale of 0 to 10 (0= reject under all circumstances, 5 very doubtful
acceptance, 10= excellent,
accept under all circumstances).
The reviewer evaluates the scientific contribution or other
general merits of the submission (depending on the category of the paper) on a scale of 0 to 10 (0= reject under all circumstances, 5 very
doubtful acceptance, 10= excellent, accept under all circumstances).
Attention: Papers which receive an average of 7 and lower in the first round of evaluation will be rejected. In this case, no revision
is possible. Only papers with an average score of 7 and higher and with no score lower than 6 will be admitted to a possible second review round.
0 = absolute reject
1 = very strong recommendation to reject
2 = very weak paper, strong recommendation to reject
3= weak paper, recommendation to reject
4= recommend rejection, but can live with acceptance if grade-average is 6 or higher
5= doubtful accept, suggest to accept only if there are clearly better votes by others
6= accept this paper, it is ok, but not ground breaking
7= accept this very solid paper
8 =strong recommendation to accept this paper
9= very strong recommendation to accept, paper contains very
10= absolute accept