Evolution Equations and Control Theory (EECT)
 

Guidelines for Reviewers of the Journal Evolution Equations and Control Theory (EECT)

Evolution Equations and Control Theory relies on expert reviewers to maintain a high standard of quality for published papers. Each paper is reviewed by experts in a given field, and reviews are the most important factor in the decision that is finally made by the Editors-in-Chief. It is desirable to have more than one review for each paper.

Procedures: All correspondence between editors and referees is by email. When a referee is asked to produce a report, she/he should reply to the Editorial Board as soon as possible, stating whether she/he accepts to act as a referee. In the case of a negative answer, the suggestion of an alternative referee or referees is greatly appreciated.

Referees are typically requested to write their reports within two months. However, there may be exceptions in the case of unusually long or difficult papers where more time for review process may be granted. In this latter case the EIC will give an estimate which will then be communicated to the Editor in charge of the paper.

In case the referees need more time, cannot produce their report in a reasonable time, or are unable to produce a report at all, referees are requested to contact the corresponding editor immediately.

Referee reports: Referees are asked to produce a report in free style. The report should address the following issues:

1. originality of the paper;

2. conformity with the aims and scope of EECT;

3. correctness of the results and clarity of exposition;

4. optimality of the results and of the proofs and relevance of the methodology in the context of the problem under consideration;

5. relevance of the results within a broader scientific scope (for example, applications to physics, chemistry, biology, economics, etc.);

6. language and grammar, if necessary.

Reports should be written to facilitate the final decision and correspondence with the authors. Suggested changes to a paper should be clearly stated. Revised manuscripts are usually sent to the referees for final evaluation.

Recommendations: The referee is invited to conclude her/his assessment with one of the following recommendations:

1. accept the paper as is;

2. reject;

3. ask the author(s) to revise the paper according to the specific suggestions in the referee's report.