|
|
Publishing PHENIX PapersThis document was last updated on June 29, 2008. PHENIX has a publication policy that lays out our policy and approach for publishing results. However, in this web page, I have collected information and links to guide you through the procedures. PWG Approval
It is the job of the Physics Working Groups
to determine that the relevant analyzed data are suitable for publication.
This is accomplished via presentations to and discussion by the PWG members, and proceding to publication requires approval by the conveners.
Often, conveners will choose to establish a
It should be noted that the proto-PPG step is not required by the publication policy. Consequently, establishment of a PPG need not be preceded by a pPPG.
It is also important to note that the existence of pPPG on a particular topic does PPG Formation
The publication policy states that once it is determined that the relevant analyzed data are suitable for dissemination outside the collaboration, a
It is PHENIX policy that the Collaboration members who have performed the initial analysis are expected to be members of the PPG. It is our custom that the PPG should also include at least one member who was
This example of a PPG formation announcement can be used as a template for future requests by PWG conveners.
There are also template LateX files for preparing papers to be submitted to the Physical Review journals.
PPG chairs should anticipate being asked to report progress to the PWG and/or conveners periodically.
A final PHENIX Analysis Note (AN) must be written and submitted by the PPG.
Notes are submitted using the AN submission form.
If the changes from the preliminary data are only minor, then an update to the preliminary AN may suffice. Collaboration Review
The near-final draft shall be circulated within the Collaboration.
It is our custom to allow two weeks' time for the collaboration to review the draft. This may be shortened if there is a pressing reason, which is documented for the Collaboration.
When a near-final draft has been updated, an ad hoc Internal Review Committee (IRC) appointed by the Spokesperson reviews the draft.
The IRC is empowered to adjudicate disagreement on the details of the paper. A near-consensus is a pre-requisite for the submission of the paper.
Consequently, we have adopted the custom that the PPG and IRC collect all Collaboration comments into a web page, and respond to each, explaining what action was taken. If a suggestion was not followed, the reason should be given.
The collected comments should be linked from the PPG page.
The final draft is circulated within the Collaboration and the proposed submission date is indicated.
With the exception of very long or substantially modified papers, the second comment period should be one week. Entirely new suggestions, stemming from a collaborator having not read the first release, are discouraged at this stage.
Post the Plots and Data Tables
As part of submitting a paper, PHENIX makes the plots and tables of the plotted data available on the web.
It is the responsibility of the PPG to prepare these materials and link them to the PPG web site. The manuscript will not be submitted before this is done.
Final plots must have the PHENIX logo added and be submitted to the plots database.
To submit, just go to the Data Plot Entry form. Submission
Submission, resubmission, and correspondence with editors for all PHENIX Collaboration publications in refereed journals shall be handled only
|
|
