From this follows the most important principle of communication: the simpler the code, the easier is the understanding, and the lower are the chances of misunderstanding. [...] The key to a high level of science published in the papers is the good peer review process that is provided by the wide range of volunteer experts in the field, who are members of the society. [...] The peer reviewers should consider the presentation of the problem, its significance, the suitability of the methods chosen, evaluate the reliability and the 14 Writing and Publishing Scientific Papers significance of the results, the views and interpretations expressed in the discussion, the necessity and clarity of the tables and figures as well as the language. [...] When the peer-review system is “double- blind”, neither party knows the other: the reviewer does not know the authors’ names, because these are removed from the manuscript, and the name of the reviewers are not released to the authors. [...] There are several related indices that aim to correct the identified disadvantages of the Hirsch-index, such as the age of the publication, the number of authors, or the size of citation “excess”.
- Published in
- United Kingdom
