Instruction for authors

Identify key steps in a reasoning, organize results in a relevant order and keep it as short as possible are crucial, yet complicated steps while writing a paper. As a guideline and a training for future publications, Emergent Scientist requires manuscript to obey strict rules, which are detailed in this section.

Please read carefully the following remarks, as well as the guidelines corresponding to your field (Chemistry, Mathematics or Physics).

Recommandations for all submissions

Submitting an article is NOT equivalent to submitting a draft to your co-authors asking for leads. The referee’s job is to judge the paper as a full, consistent work, not to give you advices on how to complete a given section. Before submitting, make sure that you and all your co-authors all fully agree on the whole content of the paper.

Science is always a collective work. We recommend that you have your manuscript reviewed by colleagues, native english speakers and supervisors where possible. They will be able to give you guidance on how to write and structure a clear scientific article. It is perfectly acceptable to have a supervisor co-author of the paper providing he/she did a significant amount of work for it.

Several manuals can easily be found to gather advices on how to write a paper. We recommend the following one : Ashby, M. (2000). How to write a paper. Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 5th Edition, Cambridge: UK.

Always keep in mind that an article is meant to be read by someone who will not know what you mean.

Once ready to submit your manuscript, please consult the submission page.

Submissions to the Physics section

Context and purpose

All scientific work takes place in a precise context, and is supposed to deliver a precise contribution. As such, manuscripts are expected to provide their readers with a clear overview of the scientific background to the work being presented, notably through their introduction (see below). Authors should be explicit about the added value of their work by stating what contributions they have made to the field of study. Simply reporting data is not sufficient. Experimental results should be accompanied with a relevant interpretation or a comparison to a model. Alternatively, a valid contribution could include the presentation of a new experimental protocol accompanied by a rigorous analysis of its performance (advantages and disadvantages) in relation to other measurement techniques.

EmSci sectioning instructions

Manuscripts are required to include explicitly the following sections.

Title

The manuscript should have a brief title that adequately reflects the content of the manuscript.

Abstract

The manuscript should contain an abstract of no more than 100 words. This should provide a brief summary of the contents of the manuscript, the methods used and the main conclusions of the work.

Introduction

Special care should be given to the first sentences of the introduction, as they constitute the first contact between the reader and the text.

The introduction should provide a short motivation for the work being presented, as well as describing the key physical mechanisms and theoretical arguments that underpin the study. Reference should be made to previous and relevant studies, so that the reader can obtain a more complete understanding of the field. This section may contain equations and figures providing that they assist in helping the reader to build an appropriate physical picture of the problem being presented.

Note that even if the work originates in a specific context such as a scientific competition, the publication should detach from it and rely on a motivation of its own.

Method

A detailed step-by-step description of the methods and theoretical models used in the study and how each set of results was obtained. This section should include (where appropriate) diagrams and descriptions or reference of any apparatus or equipment used, as well as lists of materials and where they were obtained. This section should be written in such a way that a reader could easily repeat your work and should NOT consist of a bullet pointed list of actions.

Results

This is where you will prevent your key results, either in tabular or graphical form and provide a brief description of what each item (e.g. table or figure) shows. Each notation must be properly introduced and defined.

Discussion

This section is used to provide a detailed discussion of your results in the context of new and existing theories. These could be the theories that were mentioned in the method or modifications thereof. Each figure/table that is presented in the results section would be discussed in further detail and a detailed interpretation of the results provided. This could include (for example) discussing the quality of fits of key equations to the data. Where possible, a discussion of uncertainties and errors should be provided along with a critical discussion of the limitations of the chosen methods. Suggestions for improvements to the study are also encouraged.

Dead end

The dead-end section is an original feature of Emergent Scientist. It is meant to describe avenues of inquiry that may have failed for one reason or another. A brief description of what was attempted should be provided along with a short discussion about why it did not work or why why results are considered as faulty.

The main motivations for this section is to acknowledge that failures are indivisible from research, and to prevent replication studies from trying leads doomed to fail.

Conclusion

The conclusion should provide a short summary of the key findings of the work and should be no longer than 1-2 paragraphs.

Figures and captions

Figures should be clear and legible. Notably, axes should be written in a font large enough to be easily read on a printed sheet of paper (11 pt). Data should be introduced and explained in the caption of the figure.You should not repeat what is already stated in the main body of the text.

All figures included in a paper should be useful for the understanding of the work and should hence be referenced and discussed within the main text.

Diagrams should be prepared using an appropriate drawing package. High quality plots and graphs should also be prepared using a professional looking plotting package. Acceptable figure formats are .jpg, .png, .eps, .pdf,…

References

References should be numbered and cited in numerical order (as [1], [2-5] etc.) in the main text of the article. All references should conform to the Chicago citing style and include if possible DOI for online articles and ISBN for books.

Remember that a reference is meant to be easily found by readers. If you are citing a book, provide the number of relevant pages.

Length and formatting

Emergent Scientist papers should be less than 8 pages long (reference and figures included).

Emergent Scientist does not require authors to prepare their manuscript according to a specific template. All accepted manuscripts will be typeset by EDP Sciences for proofreading and publication.

In the meantime, feel free to consult this Word template for reference only.

Submissions to the Mathematics section

Context and purpose

The mathematical section of the journal emphasizes the importance of pedagogical approaches to (under)-graduate level mathematics. The journal accepts submissions for original results - this includes the study of examples and computations - and reviews of notions that prove relevant and synthetical. The dead-end section is very important to show that solving a mathematical problem requires to explore different perspectives, which form the core process of doing research in mathematics.

EmSci sectioning instructions

Manuscripts are required to include explicitly the following sections (except for the Conclusion and the Appendix that are optional).

Title

The manuscript should have a brief title that adequately reflects the content of the manuscript.

Abstract

The manuscript should contain an abstract of no more than 100 words. This should provide a brief summary of the contents of the manuscript, the methods used and the main conclusions of the work.

Introduction

Special care should be given to the first sentences of the introduction, as they constitute the first contact between the reader and the text.

The introduction should provide a short motivation for the work being presented, as well as describing the main mathematical objects that are used or studied. Reference should be made to previous and relevant studies, so that the reader can obtain a more complete understanding of the field. This section may contain equations and figures provided that they assist the reader in building an appropriate mathematical picture of the problem being presented. The presence of an outline of the paper is optional but every result should be clearly mentioned.

Mathematical Background

This section is used to introduce both the basic notions that are used in the course of the article, as well as the new or more exotic ones that are specific to the study. This is also where the notations are settled. This will permit the article to be self-contained. The notions that are presented can be taken from a broad perspective, in order to make the context more precise. Proofs of known results may not be necessary, but explicit references should refer to those.

Results

This is where you will present the key results, for example a small theorem, an interesting application, an important computation, the results of a simulation, etc. Pedagogical reviews may also be accepted. The proofs have to be clear, and well-organized. Any computation should be understandable and well-presented.

Discussion

This section may be used to broaden the range of the results. This could include limitations, improvements and possible extensions. This section can be used for example to provide interesting applications or corollaries of the main theorem, or discuss possible directions for new research.

Dead-End

The dead-end part is an original feature of Emergent Scientist. It is meant to present the obstacles that were met during the process of research, and to describe avenues of inquiry that may have failed for one reason or another. A brief description of what was attempted should be provided along with a short discussion about why it did not work or why some of the original intuitions turned to be faulty. The main motivation for this section is to acknowledge that failures are indivisible from research, and to raise general awareness to the problems attached to certain attempts.

Conclusion

The conclusion is optional, and would provide a short summary of the key findings of the work and should be no longer than 1-2 paragraphs.

Appendix

This section can be used to store heavy calculations that are very technical and do not represent much interest. Computer programs as well could be copied here.

Figures and captions

Figures should be clear and legible. Diagrams should be explained in the caption of the figure. All figures included in a paper should be useful for the understanding of the work and should hence be referenced and discussed within the main text. Diagrams should be prepared using an appropriate drawing package. High quality plots and graphs should also be prepared using a professional looking plotting package. Acceptable figure formats are .eps and .pdf.

References

References should be numbered and cited in numerical order (as [1], [2-5] etc.) in the main text of the article. All references should conform to the Chicago citing style and include if possible DOI for online articles and ISBN for books. Remember that a reference is meant to be easily found by readers. If you are citing a book, provide the relevant chapter or pages.

Length and formatting

We recommend not going over 20 pages (reference and figures included).

Emergent Scientist does not require authors to prepare their manuscript according to a specific template. All accepted manuscripts will be typeset by EDP Sciences for proofreading and publication.

In the meantime, feel free to consult this Word template for reference only.

Submissions to the Chemistry section

Context and purpose

As such, manuscripts are expected to provide their readers with a clear overview of the scientific background to the work being presented, notably through their introduction (see below). Authors should be explicit about the originality or the added value to former works of their study by stating what contributions they have made to the field of study. Simply reporting data or reproducing former experiments (even from various articles) is not sufficient. Experimental section is crucial and can be carefully written in such a way that a reader could easily repeat the work and have precise information about the results expected. Experimental results should be accompanied with a relevant interpretation or a comparison to a model. Alternatively, a valid contribution could include the presentation of a new experimental protocol accompanied by a rigorous analysis of its performance (advantages and disadvantages) in relation to other measurement techniques.

EmSci sectioning instructions

Manuscripts are required to include explicitly the following sections.

Title

The manuscript should have a brief title that adequately reflects the content of the manuscript.

Abstract

The manuscript should contain an abstract of no more than 100 words. This should provide a brief summary of the contents of the manuscript, the methods used and the main conclusions of the work.

Introduction

Special care should be given to the first sentences of the introduction, as they constitute the first contact between the reader and the text. The introduction should provide a short motivation for the work being presented, as well as describing the key mechanisms, concepts or theoretical arguments that underpin the study. Reference should be made to previous and relevant studies, so that the reader can obtain a more complete understanding of the field. This section can contain equations, schemes and figures providing that they assist in helping the reader to build an appropriate picture of the problem being presented. Note that even if the work originates in a specific context such as a scientific competition, the publication should detach from it and rely on a motivation of its own.

Experimental section or Materials and methods

A detailed step-by-step description of the materials, methods, procedures and theoretical models used in the study and how each set of results was obtained. This section should include (when appropriate) all the details about chemical analysis of the molecules, complexes or materials synthesized and descriptions or reference of any apparatus or equipment used, as well as lists of materials and chemical products and where they were obtained or purchased. Hazard class and category code(s) of the chemical products used should be mentioned.

Results and discussion

This is where you will present your key results, either in tabular or graphical form and provide a brief description of what each item (e.g. table or figure) shows. Each notation must be properly introduced and defined. This section is used to provide a detailed discussion of your results in the context of new and existing theories. These could be the theories that were mentioned in the method or modifications thereof. Each figure/table that is presented in the results section would be discussed in further detail and a detailed interpretation of the results provided. This could include (for example) discussing the quality of fits of key equations to the data. Where possible, a discussion of uncertainties and errors should be provided along with a critical discussion of the limitations of the chosen methods.

Associated content (optional)

Digital content (video, website, images…) can be sent to be attached to the article.

Dead end

The dead-end section is an original feature of Emergent Scientist. It is meant to describe avenues of inquiry that may have failed for one reason or another. A brief description of what was attempted should be provided along with a short discussion about why it did not work or why results are considered as faulty.

The main motivations for this section is to acknowledge that failures are indivisible from research, and to prevent replication studies from trying leads doomed to fail.

Acknowledgements (optional)

In this section, authors can thank their teachers/advisors or any other persons for their help, advice or technical support for their work.

Conclusion

The conclusion should provide a short summary of the key findings of the work and should be no longer than 1-2 paragraphs. Suggestions for improvements to the study are also encouraged.

Appendix

This section can be used to store heavy calculations, detailed results that are very technical and do not represent much interest. Computer programs as well could be copied here. The spectral data (final NMR, Mass, IR spectra) of new compounds or known compounds used for physical property analysis should be mentioned in this section.

Figures and captions

Figures should be clear and legible. Notably, axes should be written in a font large enough to be easily read on a printed sheet of paper (11 pt). Data should be introduced and explained in the caption of the figure. You should not repeat what is already stated in the main body of the text.

All figures included in a paper should be useful for the understanding of the work and should hence be referenced and discussed within the main text.

Diagrams should be prepared using an appropriate drawing package. High quality plots and graphs should also be prepared using a professional looking plotting package. Acceptable figure formats are .jpg, .png, .eps, .pdf,…

References

References should be numbered and cited in numerical order (as [1], [2-5] etc.) in the main text of the article. All references should conform to the Chicago citing style and include if possible DOI for online articles and ISBN for books.

Remember that a reference is meant to be easily found by readers. If you are citing a book, provide the number of relevant pages.

Length and formatting

Emergent Scientist papers should be less than 8 pages long (reference and figures included).

Emergent Scientist does not require authors to prepare their manuscript according to a specific template. All accepted manuscripts will be typeset by EDP Sciences for proofreading and publication.

In the meantime, feel free to consult this Word template for reference only.