[eklund]

The most up to date information for authors is here:
https://www.phmsociety.org/journal/for-authors

However, briefly…

The most up to date information for authors is here:
https://www.phmsociety.org/journal/for-authors

However, briefly…

ijPHM publishes scientific papers dealing with all aspects of prognostics, diagnostics, and system health management of complex engineered systems. We accept high quality articles focused on assessing the current status and predicting the future condition of an engineered component and/or system of components. Contributions to ijPHM must report original research and will be subjected to review by referees at the discretion of the Editor. ijPHM considers only manuscripts that have not been published elsewhere (including at conferences), and that are not under consideration for publication or in press elsewhere.

ijPHM publishes full-length regular papers, technical briefs, communications, and survey papers. Full-length regular papers should describe new and carefully confirmed findings. The experimental methods used, results obtained, analysis, and conclusions must be presented clearly and objectively, such that they might be replicated by another researcher. A full paper should be long enough to describe and interpret the work clearly, placing it in the context of other research.

Prospective authors should note that ijPHM is focused on promoting the exchange of innovative ideas and advancing PHM as a scientific discipline. Poorly documented papers or papers using “proprietary” techniques may be rejected without a comprehensive review. Moreover, ijPHM should not be seen as advertising space! Excessive “branding” within a paper is also cause for rejection; e.g., “The CompanyBrand™ team used the magical CompanyBrand™ preprocessing technique to prepare the data to extract the amazing CompanyBrand™-proprietary features (which we can’t tell you about).”

ijPHM provides a very short publication cycle. Papers are reviewed initially to screen for obvious fatal defects – e.g., unacceptable English usage, excessive branding, clearly insufficient context (cited literature), etc. Acceptable papers are then sent to one of the members of the Editorial Board to be assigned reviewers. All full-length papers are reviewed by a minimum of three qualified reviewers. Specific peer-review feedback is provided to the author within 4-6 weeks of initial submission. If the paper is approved for publication, necessary revisions should be made and submitted within six weeks.

[Author]

Posts