Mountains at night with stars and galaxy

Review Criteria: Geophysical Research Messages

Review criteria for GRL

Geophysical Inquiry Letters (GRL) aims to provide rapid publication of forefront research that has an immediate impact on the science community. The journal features articles from a wide range of disciplines and our reviewers help in evaluating both the scientific content (Categories 1-4) and the presentation quality (Categories A-C) to determine if a submitted manuscript meets GRL standards. The terminal decision on a manuscript is made solely by the Editor using the expertise of several reviewers and the established criteria. Read this Eos commodity for tips on writing a solid peer review.

We welcome and will pass on to authors any specific suggestions that materially improve the quality of a manuscript. Reviewer comments are conveyed anonymously to the authors unless yous bespeak that you lot wish to make your identity known.

GRL highlights several manuscripts in each issue. If you feel a manuscript is peculiarly exciting and deserves to be highlighted, delight include a short note virtually its importance in your review.

Person on computer with data

Scientific discipline and presentation categories

GRL uses science and presentation categories to evaluate manuscripts. Please read the post-obit criteria to help decide which categories nigh accurately describe the manuscript you're reviewing.

Science category 1

The manuscript meets one or more than of the post-obit criteria. If the manuscript falls in Category 1, please give sufficient detail as to which of the below points are applicable and why.

  • Important new science at the forefront of an AGU discipline
  • Innovative inquiry with interdisciplinary/broad geophysical application
  • Musical instrument or methods manuscript that introduces new techniques with important geophysical applications

Scientific discipline category two

The manuscript is potentially Category 1 merely significant clarification/revision is needed. If possible, please specify the meaning revisions that might allow this manuscript to encounter Category ane criteria. For example, the manuscript presents:

  • Some unclear or incomplete scientific reasoning;
  • Inadequate presentation of data; or
  • An instrument/method where the geophysical application is non obvious.

Science category 3

The paper is publishable in the refereed literature but is unlikely to get a Category 1 newspaper. It is:

  • A scientifically correct paper but non obviously a significant accelerate in a geophysical field;
  • A solid paper with little firsthand impact on the research of others: e.g., a routine application of a standard research technique or a new measurement or laboratory method with limited geophysical awarding; and/or
  • A adept, clear newspaper but basically incremental comeback to existing data sets, models, or instruments.

Science category 4

This paper is non publishable in an AGU periodical.

  • In that location are major scientific errors in the manuscript.
  • The same material has essentially been published or is being considered for publication elsewhere.
  • The technique is non useful.
  • The research expanse is non representative of an AGU subject area.

Presentation category A

Category A manuscripts should come across each of the following criteria:

  • The abstruse is succinct (<150 words), authentic, and understandable to a non-specialist;
  • The manuscript is generally well-written, logically organized, and adequately illustrated;
  • The figures and tables are understandable and readable (when sized for GRL); and
  • English usage and grammar are adequate, with few spelling/typographical errors (however, reviewers should specify any minor fixes).

Presentation category B

The newspaper is potentially a Category A manuscript with revision. If you select Category B, you should requite explicit management as to which sections/features need revision, and extension or reduction, for example:

  • The abstruse needs to exist rewritten/shortened;
  • The manuscript is not well written, it is not logically organized, or is inadequately illustrated;
  • The manuscript needs to be (and can be) shortened; and/or
  • English usage, grammar, or spelling errors detract from the newspaper.

Presentation category C

The manuscript cannot readily be revised by the authors into Category A. The following may be true:

  • Specific ideas cannot be adequately presented inside the GRL limit of 12 publication units;
  • The organization and illustration of the manuscript make it too hard to review fairly;
  • English usage, grammar, and/or spelling errors are endemic and require substantial copyediting before this manuscript can be published (or even reviewed adequately).

Data policy compliance

Does the paper comply with AGU's Information Policy?

Reviewers must:

  • Read each Acknowledgments section carefully to verify that ALL data used in the inquiry have been included.
  • Check whatever hyperlinks that take been provided in the Acknowledgments to verify the accessibility of data.
  • Written report any failure to comply with the information policy when submitting a review or making a recommendation to the editor.