I sent an article to a top journal. It was reviewed by 2 reviewers. The decision made was ‘revision’. I revised the manuscript and sent a detailed point by point response to reviewer comments. During revision the status changed directly from ‘with editor’ to ‘decision in process’ within a span of 4 days. I was under the impression that the reviewers would go through the paper again and based on their comments a decision would be made by the editor. But it seems that the editor is making the decision himself. Is this correct?
. The result is yet to be received, so fingers crossed 😉

I am currently a postdoc in computer science. Last year I completed my PhD. I have published one research paper during my PhD with my research supervisor. I am trying to work on that paper. I mean I have got something and I think it is going to be an incremental result of the previous research paper.

Question: Do I need to get permission from my past supervisor to publish a paper that builds on our previous co-authored paper?

What steps does a manuscript typically go through from submission to publication (or rejection) in a typical journal? How are these steps referred to, in particular by editorial systems, and how long do they each typically take?

Note that this question is about the typical situation and hence not about:

  • Journals with an atypical workflow, e.g. those that allow for an instantaneous reviewer–author interaction.
  • Exceptional steps or rare occurrences such as withdrawal or clerical errors.

This is a canonical question on this topic as per this Meta post. Due to its nature, it is rather broad and not exemplary for a regular question on this site. Please feel free to improve this question.

I have a three years bachelors degree from a university in India(Top 10 by NIRF ranking). I want to do my masters in Canada but I have heard that a 4 years bachelor’s degree is required.
The thing is, my 3 years bachelor’s degree has the same amount of credit compared to a 4 years bachelor’s degree. So in this case, am I eligible or not?

I submitted a paper (together with my team) for a conference. The paper has been accepted and I have been asked as speaker to present this work.

In my presentation, should I try to use exact copies of the figures used in the paper, or should I adapt the figures?

Changing figures could make them a bit clearer in the context of a presentation (for example, the presentations are to be done with 16:9 slides, but the paper is written in two-column text, and as such has rather square graphs), but I don’t know if this will make them harder to relate to the graphs in the paper.

I’m working on a project where I’ve come across a couple relevant papers that are marked as “preliminary drafts” and/or with a request not to cite them because they are preliminary.

Should I cite the most similar, published work, ask the authors for their preference as close to publication as possible, or take a different route?

Flipped classroom teaching has become gradually more popular and studies show that the effectiveness of learning is better than in traditional lecture type courses. I’ve tried to give feedback to my own university after courses that this should be pursued, but so far there has been no changes here.

I’d like to know what percentage of courses are using flipped classrooms and how it varies between geographical location and subject/field. I would assume that fields like mathematics and engineering with complex systems to learn would have greater benefits if transitioned to a flipped type since time would be saved on general explanations by students figuring that out on themselves and lectures would concentrate on clarifying questions from the students.

I want to submit two separate works to two different conferences in CS field. The conference deadlines differ only by 3 weeks and one of them would be held in November while the other in September.

The problem is that i designed an algorithm and used that in both of the works. This algorithm is not the essential part of these papers, so i can introduce it completely in paper A as a novel method and just cite and use it in paper B; or vice versa!

But the problem is that at the time of submission, both of them are just submitted works, and i’m not sure if citing a submitted work is acceptable? Especially because if i only cite and use it in paper B, the reviewers cannot read paper A to see the complete proofs.
And even i’m not sure which paper may be accepted/rejected!

Also if i introduce the method in both papers as a novel method, then if both of them get accepted they will consider it plagiarism!