Procedures for Handling Manuscripts

1. The panel of Associate Editors reviews submitted papers to identify those that are clearly not suitable for the Annals.  These papers can then be returned quickly to the author.  For those papers that may be acceptable, an appropriate Associate Editor is identified.

2. The Associate Editor is contacted by e-mail to determine if he or she is willing to handle the paper.  If so, the paper is transmitted to the Associate Editor.  If the paper was submitted as hardcopy, two copies of the manuscript are sent to the Associate Editor. If the paper was submitted electronically, the file is transmitted.  Eventually, we hope to have a system that allows authors to upload manuscripts and Associate Editors and referees to download manuscripts.

3. The Associate Editor identifies an appropriate referee.  In some cases, two referees may be used, in particular, if the Associate Editor is not well equipped to evaluate the paper.  I suggest that prospective referees be contacted by e-mail to determine willingness to serve.  Please see Guidelines for Referees (comments and suggestions would be appreciated.)  The Associate Editor sends one copy of the manuscript and a copy of the guidelines to the referee.

4. The referee should prepare a report within three months.

5. The Associate Editor sends the report to the Editor (preferably electronically) along with one of the following recommendations:

   1. Accept subject to minor revisions.  If I concur with this recommendation, in most cases, I will not send the revised manuscript back to the Associate Editor unless specifically requested to do so.  If I don’t concur, I will contact you to explain why.

   2. Accept but after substantial revision.  If I concur with this recommendation, I will ordinarily send the revised manuscript to the Associate Editor for further review.

   3. Reject with the suggestion that the paper may contain ideas that can be developed into a paper suitable for the Annals.  A new manuscript will be treated as a new submission.  Try to be as clear and specific as possible regarding the reasons for rejection and the ideas in the paper that may lead to an acceptable paper.

   4. Reject.  Again, try to be as clear and specific as possible regarding the reasons for rejection.