Mathematica Universalis

Editorial Process

The editorial process of Mathematica Universalis is designed to ensure the publication of original, rigorous, clearly presented, and ethically prepared research in mathematics and related fields. The journal follows a structured peer-review procedure in which each manuscript is evaluated according to its scientific merit, mathematical correctness, originality, clarity, and relevance to the aims and scope of the journal.

The editorial workflow is based on fairness, transparency, confidentiality, and academic integrity. All manuscripts are handled by qualified editors and reviewed by experts in the relevant field.

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts to Mathematica Universalis through the journal’s official submission system or by following the submission procedure indicated on the journal website.

Before submission, authors should ensure that the manuscript:

  • is original and has not been published elsewhere;

  • is not under consideration by another journal;

  • falls within the aims and scope of the journal;

  • is written clearly and professionally;

  • contains complete mathematical arguments and proofs;

  • includes appropriate references to the relevant literature;

  • follows the journal’s formatting and ethical requirements.

Manuscripts are preferably prepared in LaTeX, especially for papers containing mathematical formulas, theorems, proofs, diagrams, or technical notation.

2. Initial Administrative Check

After submission, the editorial office performs an initial administrative check. This stage verifies whether the manuscript is complete and suitable for further consideration.

The administrative check may include:

  • verification of manuscript files;

  • checking author information and affiliations;

  • checking abstract, keywords, and Mathematical Subject Classification codes;

  • checking the reference list;

  • verifying compliance with formatting requirements;

  • checking for missing figures, tables, appendices, or supplementary files;

  • confirming that ethical declarations are provided where necessary.

Manuscripts that are incomplete or improperly prepared may be returned to the authors for correction before editorial evaluation.

3. Preliminary Editorial Assessment

After the administrative check, the manuscript is assessed by the Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor, or an assigned handling editor. The purpose of this stage is to determine whether the submission is appropriate for peer review.

The editor evaluates whether the manuscript:

  • fits the scope of Mathematica Universalis;

  • presents a clear mathematical contribution;

  • appears to contain original research;

  • meets basic standards of academic writing;

  • has sufficient mathematical depth;

  • includes proper citations and context;

  • does not show obvious ethical or technical problems.

A manuscript may be rejected at this stage without external review if it is clearly outside the journal’s scope, lacks sufficient originality, contains serious formal deficiencies, is not written in an understandable form, or does not meet the basic standards of mathematical research.

4. Plagiarism and Ethical Screening

The journal may screen submitted manuscripts for plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate reuse of published material, or other ethical issues.

The editorial team may examine:

  • similarity with published articles;

  • overlap with preprints or previous versions;

  • duplicate or simultaneous submission;

  • improper citation practices;

  • possible manipulation of references;

  • authorship issues;

  • conflicts of interest;

  • improper use of data, software, or computational results.

If serious ethical concerns are identified, the manuscript may be rejected or the authors may be asked to provide clarification.

5. Assignment to a Handling Editor

If the manuscript passes the preliminary assessment, it is assigned to a handling editor with expertise in the relevant area of mathematics. The handling editor is responsible for managing the peer-review process and making a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief or editorial board.

The handling editor should not manage a manuscript if there is a conflict of interest with the authors or the submitted work. In such cases, the manuscript is assigned to another qualified editor.

6. Selection of Reviewers

The handling editor invites independent reviewers who have expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research experience, publication record, and familiarity with the specific mathematical topic.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate the manuscript objectively and confidentially. They should decline the invitation if they lack the necessary expertise, cannot complete the review within the required time, or have a conflict of interest.

Normally, the journal seeks reports from at least two qualified reviewers before making a final decision.

7. Peer Review

During peer review, reviewers examine the manuscript in detail and provide written reports. The review focuses on the scientific quality and reliability of the submitted work.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate:

  • originality of the results;

  • mathematical correctness of definitions, lemmas, theorems, and proofs;

  • clarity of assumptions and notation;

  • relevance and completeness of the literature review;

  • significance of the contribution;

  • correctness of examples, computations, algorithms, or applications;

  • organization and readability of the manuscript;

  • suitability for publication in Mathematica Universalis.

Reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. Their comments should be constructive, precise, and useful for both the editors and the authors.

8. Editorial Decision

After receiving the reviewers’ reports, the handling editor evaluates the recommendations and prepares an editorial decision. The final decision is based on the reviewers’ comments, the editor’s own assessment, and the journal’s publication standards.

Possible editorial decisions include:

Accept

The manuscript is suitable for publication in its present form or requires only very minor technical corrections.

Minor Revision

The manuscript is scientifically sound but requires small improvements before acceptance. These may include corrections of notation, clarification of arguments, language improvements, formatting changes, or minor additions to the references.

Major Revision

The manuscript has potential but requires substantial changes before it can be reconsidered. These may include correction of proofs, improvement of the structure, clarification of assumptions, strengthening of examples, expansion of the literature review, or revision of the main results.

Reject and Resubmit

The manuscript is not acceptable in its current form, but the topic may be suitable for the journal if the authors prepare a substantially revised version. A new submission may be treated as a new manuscript.

Reject

The manuscript is not suitable for publication because of serious mathematical errors, insufficient originality, weak contribution, ethical concerns, poor presentation, or mismatch with the journal’s scope.

9. Revision by Authors

If revision is requested, authors should submit a revised manuscript together with a detailed response letter. The response letter should explain how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed.

Authors should:

  • respond to every comment carefully;

  • indicate the exact changes made in the manuscript;

  • provide mathematical explanations where necessary;

  • justify any suggestions they did not follow;

  • highlight or mark changes if requested by the journal;

  • ensure that the revised manuscript is complete and consistent.

A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed directly by the handling editor, depending on the extent of the revisions.

10. Second Review or Editorial Reassessment

For manuscripts requiring major revision, the revised version may be sent back to the reviewers for further evaluation. Reviewers may assess whether the authors have adequately addressed the concerns raised during the first review round.

For manuscripts requiring minor revision, the handling editor may evaluate the revised manuscript without requesting additional external review.

Further rounds of revision may be requested when necessary. However, the journal aims to avoid unnecessary delays and to reach a clear editorial decision as efficiently as possible.

11. Final Acceptance

A manuscript is accepted only when the editorial team is satisfied that it meets the scientific and ethical standards of Mathematica Universalis.

Before final acceptance, the editor may verify that:

  • all essential reviewer comments have been addressed;

  • the mathematical results are clearly stated and justified;

  • the manuscript is properly formatted;

  • references are complete and accurate;

  • author information is correct;

  • ethical declarations are included where required;

  • figures, tables, and supplementary materials are suitable for publication.

Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to production.

12. Copyediting and Production

After acceptance, the manuscript may undergo copyediting and technical preparation. This stage improves the presentation of the article while preserving the authors’ scientific content.

Production may include:

  • correction of typographical and formatting errors;

  • verification of mathematical notation;

  • checking of references;

  • preparation of final PDF and online versions;

  • assignment of article metadata;

  • checking figures, tables, and supplementary files;

  • preparation of the final publication format.

Authors may be asked to review proofs before publication.

13. Author Proofs

Before publication, authors may receive proofs of the accepted article. Authors should check the proofs carefully and correct only typographical, formatting, or production-related errors.

Major scientific changes are not normally allowed at the proof stage unless approved by the editor.

Authors should return corrected proofs within the requested time to avoid delays in publication.

14. Publication

After final approval, the article is published on the journal website or through the appropriate journal platform. If the journal operates under an overlay-journal model, the final certified version may be linked to an open repository version of the article.

Published articles should include essential bibliographic information such as title, authors, abstract, keywords, classification codes, publication date, DOI where applicable, and citation details.

The journal aims to ensure that published research is accessible, properly archived, and available to the mathematical community.

15. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Issues

After publication, the journal may consider corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions if significant issues are discovered.

A correction may be issued when an article contains an error that does not invalidate the main results but requires clarification.

A retraction may be considered in cases involving serious mathematical errors, plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated results, unethical conduct, or other major problems affecting the reliability of the article.

All post-publication actions should be handled transparently, fairly, and in accordance with accepted publication ethics.

16. Confidentiality and Integrity

All manuscripts submitted to Mathematica Universalis are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose manuscript content or use unpublished material for personal advantage.

The editorial process must be conducted with impartiality and respect for all authors. Decisions should be based only on academic quality, mathematical validity, originality, and relevance to the journal.

17. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently by the journal’s editors and are not influenced by personal, institutional, political, commercial, or financial considerations.

The journal is committed to protecting the integrity of the peer-review process and ensuring that all manuscripts are judged according to scholarly standards.