The journal imposes no hard limits on the paper length as long as what authors write is important. Submissions that exceed 40-50 pages in journal format (including illustrations and references) should however be accompanied by a short justification as to why a briefer discussion of their research results is not advisable.
Earlier Publications on the Same Research
The journal does not mind if research that is being submitted for consideration of publication has already been previously published in bits and pieces at workshops and conferences (but not journals), as long as the compilation of earlier research reports plus new materials provide significant new insights and added value. Authors should clearly explain the relationship of their submission to their prior publications, and point out the significant added value of their submission in comparison to their prior publications.
The Publisher also accepts manuscripts that have prior versions on non-commercial pre-print sites such as arXiv.org . You can find more information here .
The first page should include the following declaration: "This paper or a similar version is not currently under review by a journal or conference. This paper is void of plagiarism or self-plagiarism as defined by the Committee on Publication Ethics and Springer Guidelines ". You can find more information on the Ethical Responsibilities of Authors under the "Instructions for Authors" on the journal homepage .
For the review process, authors should include a separate preamble or dedicated first section in their submission that answers the questions below. Answers should preferably be 1-3 sentences in length but no longer than a paragraph.
What is the main research question that your planned submission addresses?
What makes your research results important and worth being reported in a top-ranked journal (as opposed to a conference)?
Why does your planned submission fit into the scope of UMUAI?
What are the main limitations of your approach?
What is the relationship of your work to the closest 2-3 publications by others? (also cite them)
Formatting and General Instructions For Authors
Formatting instructions and other relevant submission information are available in the section "Instructions for Authors" on the publisher's journal homepage . The publisher can process most popular word processing formats and will convert accepted articles into a proprietary content management format. The authors' list of references therefore needs to include all bibliographic data for the five publication types listed in the Instructions for Authors. The exact format of the reference list is unimportant though. LaTeX authors who wish to approximate the final journal layout in their paper can use LaTeX and BibTeX style files, and additionally the natbib package if they wish.
The journal is currently transitioning to Editorial Manager, an electronic submission and peer review system. If you are submitting a new paper, please use this system . If you are resubmitting a paper of which the first version was submitted before 29 January 2017, please keep using the previous email submission method for now by sending your new version to email@example.com . The receipt of a submission will be acknowledged within a few days.
Review and Production Process
Since its inception in 1991, UMUAI has extensively relied on electronic reviewing and production. Nowadays the journal is all-electronic, with hardcopies being printed on demand. The preferred submission format is PDF, but virtually all other popular formats can be accommodated as well.
When an article is submitted, the editor verifies that it meets the basic requirements with regard to scope, originality and substantiation of the research results, and that it has a reasonable chance of being accepted. Members of the editorial board may be consulted during this process. About 40% of submissions are eliminated in this phase. A plagiarism detection system is used to verify the scientific integrity of the submission. If serious plagiarism is detected, the authors' institutions will get informed.
If the article is eligible for a full review, its title and abstract are being sent to UMUAI's Editorial Board, to Special Reviewers of the journal as well as other qualified referees, in order to solicit volunteers for a review. Papers become forwarded to 3-4 carefully selected and balanced reviewers who are being asked to answer the following questions:
What is the scientific contribution of this submission? (both in the authors' view and your own, if different)
How relevant is this submission to the scope of this journal?
How novel is the described research?
How significant is the described research?
Is the article technically sound?
Are the authors aware of related work?
If the authors published earlier conference papers on the same research, does the submission provide “significant insights and added-value" in comparison to the prior publication(s)?
Do the authors describe the limitations of their approach in a satisfactory manner?
Does the title of this paper clearly and sufficiently reflect its contents?
Is the presentation, organization and length satisfactory?
Can you suggest additions or amendments that will increase the value of this paper?
Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts?
Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable?
Are the references adequate and are they all necessary?
Are the key words and abstracts/summary informative?
Is the paper
acceptable for publication in its present form?
acceptable for publication with minor revisions?
acceptable for publication with major revisions only?
unacceptable for publication, even with major revisions?
Please provide a short summary justification for this assessment:
If you checked (a) or (b) above: would you want to nominate this paper for the James Chen Annual Award for Best UMUAI Paper?
To what extent does this paper fall within your area of expertise?
( ) fully ( ) well ( ) partially ( ) hardly
Please list any other general comments or specific suggestions.
Confidential comments to the editor
Upon the receipt of all reviews, the editor compiles a summary review which is being sent both to the authors and to all reviewers in anonymous form. UMUAI aims at evaluating regular papers within two months and submissions to special issues within three months, with a success rate of about 80% currently. Reviews during the summer months in the northern hemisphere may take two months longer.
The vast majority of papers that ultimately gets accepted is being considerably revised in reaction to reviewers' comments, and submitted for a re-review. It is not uncommon that authors still have to perform additional research to be eligible for resubmission.
After acceptance, authors submit the source files of their articles to the publisher electronically. Proofs are returned to the authors in PDF format within 2 weeks. The final articles are posted on the publisher's website, first as pre-prints and then collected into journal issues. The electronic articles can be accessed by individuals and institutions who hold an electronic subscription. The paper versions of journal issues appear around 4 weeks later and are being mailed to insititutional and individual subscribers.
This extensive use of electronic communication and electronic publishing benefits the authors, the editor, the reviewers, and the publisher. Reviewers do not receive papers unexpectedly, but are informed about incoming submissions and can pick those papers in which they are interested and which they are willing to review within a certain period of time. Both the quality and the punctuality of the reviews is thereby considerably increased. Since electronic papers can be directly processed by the publisher, the error rate is also minimized and the production costs are decreased.
Submission of Special Issue Proposals
To propose as special issue, please produce a short PDF document containing the following and email it to the editor.
TITLE. A tentative title.
MOTIVATION AND SCOPE. 1-2 paragraphs description of the motivation for and scope of the special issue. This can be used for the call for papers.
LIST OF TOPICS. A tentative topic list for the call for papers.
SCHEDULE. A preliminary schedule for the special issue. Normally this includes an extended abstract deadline (abstracts are used to ensure full paper submissions fit the scope of the special issue), a notification for extended abstracts, a full paper submission deadline, a notification, a revised paper deadline, a notification and a camera ready deadline.
PUBLISHED ARTICLES THAT FIT INTO THE SCOPE. A list and links to five to ten published conference and journal articles that would fit into the scope of the proposed issue (no problem if there are no journal articles yet). Pick these carefully to show the emphasis is right for this journal. The purpose of this list is to show that there is an active community in the area you propose for the special issue.
RESEARCH GROUPS THAT EXPRESSED INTEREST. Names of 4-5 individuals or research groups with URLs, whom you have contacted with regard to this issue and who expressed an interest in submitting by the deadline that you chose.
GUEST EDITORS. A short bio of the editors to show you are the right people to lead on this. Normally a special issue has 2-3 editors.