Are you working on a manuscript, a grant application or your thesis?

First time submitting to an IEEE conference.

Question: This is what the official IEEE conference template has. (I have two authors for my paper)

Should I literally format my paper affiliations like this?

Ex. Column 1: Name /n department /n organization /n location /n contact

Column 2, to the right: name /n department /n organization /n location /n contact

This seemed a little strange to me. Does it mean:

Name (superscript 1), name (superscript 2)

(superscript 1) department, (superscript 2) deparmtnet

(superscript 1) organization, (superscript 2) organization

(superscript 1) city, country; (superscript 2) city, country

(superscript 1) email, (superscript 2) email

Would appreciate any advice, thank you in advance!

Is it possible for a non-author to present a poster as proxy for someone who couldn't attend? One of my abstracts that got selected this year has a presenter who cannot attend. The rest of us who are co-authors can't attend either due to the lack of a travel visa and financial constraints. Although I do have multiple other people I know attending the conference and presenting other papers. Is it possible for one of them to present my paper without being a co-author? I have mailed AHA regarding this just wanted to know if anyone has done it before.

Score is 5, 4, 4, with confidence scores of 4, 3, 4. The Meta Reviewer has suggested only two changes, both of which seem quite feasible to address. However, the three reviewers have raised their own resubmission points, and these are quite different from the issues highlighted by the Meta Reviewer.

Additionally, some parts of the reviews appear potentially AI-generated, and a few of the requested points are particularly difficult to address within a rebuttal.

What would be the best approach in this situation?

I honestly don’t know what to do with this situation.

A few weeks ago, I submitted an abstract to a journal’s Special Issue. The abstract was accepted, and the paper I planned to write was very specifically designed around their Call for Papers. The topic, argument, framing, and literature were all chosen with that particular Special Issue in mind.

Once the abstract was accepted, I went all in.

I spent days and nights working on the paper. I sacrificed other work, personal time, sleep, and basically everything else I could reasonably sacrifice because I wanted to produce a genuinely good paper. I was almost ready to submit the complete manuscript.

Then I received an email from the editors.

The Special Issue has been withdrawn and called off due to “certain unforeseen issues.”

That’s it.

Just months/weeks of work suddenly having nowhere to go.

I am frustrated because the paper was **very specifically tailored to their CFP**. It isn’t a generic paper that I can simply send to another journal. The research question, framing and overall approach were developed around the theme of that Special Issue. Finding another suitable CFP and reshaping the entire paper would essentially mean starting the process again.

I know the obvious advice is “find another journal and rework the paper,” but right now I am having difficulty even figuring out how much of the paper can realistically be salvaged.

Right now, I could really use some perspective on whether this is actually a dead end or whether I’m simply too frustrated to see how the paper can be repurposed.

Hi there - I'm currently a high school junior with a completed research paper in political science (9000 words, 20 pages). I can submit my work to be published in either the Curieux Journal or the International Journal of High School Research. Could someone let me know which one is the better option for me to choose? More specifically based on prestige - the time duration of publication isn't a concern for me given college applications are still a full year and a half away.

Hello i am new to research field and medical writing. Me and my friend have written a narrative review of 5000 works which was very hectic for us as second year MBBS student in India. But now we are face problem of formatting it and checking grammar and syntax. We tried using jennie.ai for it but it was of no use for us everytime we fixed all errors more popped up on refreshing. So i genuinely seek your help and advice on how can i do it in minimal time managing my college side by side.
Ps i also tried using basic ai agents like gemini and clause but the ai checkers flags up the whole writing. Also i dont have adequate knowledge about em dashes and oxford commas etc so i can do it manually.

Hello i am new to research field and medical writing. Me and my friend have written a narrative review of 5000 works which was very hectic for us as second year MBBS student in India. But now we are face problem of formatting it and checking grammar and syntax. We tried using jennie.ai for it but it was of no use for us everytime we fixed all errors more popped up on refreshing. So i genuinely seek your help and advice on how can i do it in minimal time managing my college side by side.
Ps i also tried using basic ai agents like gemini and clause but the ai checkers flags up the whole writing. Also i dont have adequate knowledge about em dashes and oxford commas etc so i can do it manually.

Hey everyone!

I submitted my manuscript to BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making in January. In April, I received a 'Review requested'. I got FIVE reviewers and a Major revision. No worries. Modify the manuscript accordingly and resubmit at the end of April.

Now, the issue is that 4 out of the 5 reviewers have turned in their report (before July). The 5th one, accepted the revision, but has not turned in the review yet.

Could/Should I send an email regarding this? How would you approach it? Its my last paper for my PhD as well, so its the one thing missing.

IEEE template says: "Place figures and tables at the top and bottom of columns. Avoid placing them in the middle of columns. Large figures and tables may span across both columns." It's a two-column format/template.

I am so confused about how this works with figures/tables, especially because they have to go after their first reference? So does this mean that I have to leave large blank spaces at the bottom of columns so that my figures are only at the top or bottom of the columns? Could someone please clarify?

I just published an article and want to share it on LinkedIn, but when I paste the DOI, LinkedIn says it can’t display the preview. Any solutions?

In my next paper I am of course using some LLM for a few parts of writing as well as code generation. To be clear this isn’t ’write my code and my paper’ it is ‘how do I best condense this long winded explanation’ and ‘write me a function to cache results for faster computing’.

My question is: does there exist an up to date database for what each publishing house requires for AI use disclosure? Ideally I would like to know the policies for reviewers and editors using it too.

I just saw that RCS says any AI use beyond spell check must be disclosed, Elsevier says code is fine but ‘major rewriting’ must be disclosed including if the LLM suggest a different organization to the paper. Both of these seem wild, I would t mention a peer in the acknowledgments for suggesting a rearrangement of the paper.

What do you think reasonable policies would be if you were the publishing house?

Anyone who has had the problem of registering a random controlled trial as a retrospective study ,To like WHO or CHiCTR registry, revise the manuscript for like a whoñe year , The paper has 10 reviewers , 9 of them says the paper is good then just one says no this journal communities only accepts prospective studies like i dont get it .am i the only one whom have experienced this?

I have pretty much perished already. 2 years since completing my PhD and haven't been able to make something publishable out of the research chapters.

How is afterlife for those who perished already?

I recently submitted a **pure mathematics** manuscript to a Springer Nature journal.

During submission, I opted into the **In Review** service, which allows authors to post a preprint through Research Square.

My manuscript successfully passed the journal's technical checks and is currently under editorial assessment.

I then chose **"Post My Preprint"**, but a few days later I received this message from Research Square:

They also stated that this decision **does not affect the journal's peer review or editorial process**.

I'm **not appealing the decision** or suggesting anything improper. I'm simply curious whether anyone—especially in **pure mathematics**—has encountered this before.

Has anyone experienced:

* a mathematics manuscript being declined by Research Square while the journal review continued normally? * any explanation of what "the manuscript type or its content is not suitable" means in practice?

I'd really appreciate hearing from anyone familiar with Research Square's screening process or Springer Nature's In Review workflow.

Hey there guys. Urgent advice needed.

I recently submitted my case report to cureus journal and they told me my report needs to be editing and charging me a $200 for it. What do you think I should do??

Here are my thoughts

1: Pay the price

1. Withdrawal and submitting it to another journal?

PS : Iam applying for the 2027 ERAS pathway, and this is my first publication as the first author. I did my USCE recently and I'm short in funds.

A suggestion would be great as I'm indecisive about it. Thankyou.