Guidelines for Reviewers

We would like to thank reviewers for their critical contribution to this Transactions and the broader scientific community.

The IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems is an archival technical journal publishing high-quality papers on network systems with particular emphasis to control-related problems. The journal, however, is also open to contributions on network systems concerning their design, study, engineering, optimization, and emerging behavior as these topics can inform and guide design and control.

Papers submitted to the Transactions include rigorous methodological/theory papers on network systems, application papers that have a significant degree of modeling or methodological novelty in some application area of network systems, or papers that combine a methodological contribution with its application to a particular domain. Potential application domains can be many, including, among others, engineered systems, social science, economics, and biological systems. In general, the journal is interested in papers that make novel contributions to systems with interconnected components, irrespective of the target application area.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate both the quality of the technical contribution and the quality of the exposition. To be acceptable for publication, the manuscript must describe a new, previously unpublished, and interesting contribution to network systems. It is important to emphasize that reviewers should evaluate whether the contribution is interesting and potentially relevant to answering a fundamental question in network systems or relevant to some application domain. Being able to solve a problem with correct mathematics does not necessarily imply that the problem is worth solving.

As mentioned above, the quality of the exposition is an important criterion of a reviewer’s evaluation. The reviewer should ask a number of questions. Is the paper readable? Are all concepts clearly explained? Is all notation and terminology clearly defined before used? Are there places where more detailed explanations are needed? Parts of the paper that can be compressed? Technical arguments that can be shortened? Is the importance of the problem sufficiently stressed?Is the paper sufficiently self-contained and accessible to non-experts in the narrow technical subfield?

Is the paper written in proper English? The review, when needed, should make an effort to provide detailed guidance to the author(s) to address such exposition shortcomings. We encourage reviewers to read the information provided to authors which clarifies policies on overlap with other published work (e.g., conference proceedings). Reviewers should feel free to communicate with the Associate Editor and seek further guidance when needed. Any feedback or suggestions on the review process are welcome. Such feedback should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief or theEditorial Office.