MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2109397480 · doi:10.1093/pcp/pci161

New Trials of Plant and Cell Physiology in 2005

2005· article· en· W2109397480 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hiroo Fukuda

Notice bibliographique

RevuePlant and Cell Physiology · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiquePlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTable (database)ChinaLibrary scienceHistoryGeographyDemographyArchaeologySociologyComputer scienceDatabase

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The number of manuscripts submitted to PCP in 2004 was 523 (I am sorry that 526, which appeared in the Editorial of the 2005 February issue, was wrong), which is the greatest number so far (Table 1). This year, the number of manuscripts submitted by the end of May exceeded that of last year. The increase in submitted manuscripts is due mainly to increased submissions from overseas (Table 1), including China, the USA, Germany, Korea, India, Taiwan, Canada, Australia, Spain, Italy and France. The decrease in the acceptance rate of manuscripts since 2002 is remarkable (Table 1), and it may reach about 40% this year. The Editors are discussing the introduction of ‘decline but encourage resubmission’ instead of ‘review after revision’. This will be introduced later this year (see below). As indicated in the February issue, the impact factor of PCP increased steadily from 2.259 in 1999 to 3.159 in 2003. Very recently, ISI Web published the 2004 impact factors, in which that of PCP was 3.258, indicating that our journal is still developing. We also have another important figure for evaluation of journals, i.e. online access. Fig. 1 shows the numbers of times that online access was used for HTML, Abstract and PDF files. The numbers for all the items increased around 3–4 times more during the last 2.5 years. As regards online access, a list of the top 10 most frequently visited articles and the access data will be e-mailed to the corresponding authors of the top 10 articles each month. The same data will also be provided on the JSPP homepage. Here I describe Publish Ahead of Print (PAP) again, which was introduced in January this year. PAP services will enable a paper to be online within an average of 7 days after acceptance. The authors simply need to submit their paper, and their accepted paper will appear as advance access articles at our online journal site and can even be cited. I describe here one of the fastest cases. A paper submitted to PCP as a Rapid Paper on February 23, 2005 was accepted on March 10, and appeared online on March 13. It took only 18 days from submission to its appearance online, which is one of the fastest publication times among various journals. I believe that such rapid publication will help overcome any strong competition. However, people need to be cautious about PAP. A paper that appears in PAP may not be consistent with the final form of the paper, which will be published in an issue after copyediting and proofreading. Both versions will be identified by a unique tag called the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) such as doi:10.1093/pcp/pci999. When citing an Advance Access article, please cite the DOI number so the readers will be directed to the final version of the article. For PAP, please visit the Plant and Cell Physiology Advance Access site on the top page of the JSPP homepage. In the 2005 January issue, PCP published five review articles on rice in celebration of the decoding of the entire rice genome sequence in December 2004. This was intended to provide common terminology to explain traits and developmental stages, and to give information about the current situation of rice resources such as mutant libraries. To allow a wider group of plant scientists to read them or to use them as a textbook of monocots, we published the five review articles as a booklet, where four new beautiful plates were added containing various tissues in stems, leaves, roots and spikelets. You will be able to buy this from Oxford University Press (http://www.oupjapan.co.jp/journals/files/RG_order.pdf). We adopted four categories for judgement of papers submitted to PCP, ‘accept without revision’, ‘accept after minor revision’, ‘review after revision’ and ‘decline’. From October 1, 2005, we will substitute ‘decline, but encourage resubmission’ for ‘review after revision’. We are aiming at rapid publication of papers, but the manuscripts that were categorized as ‘review after revision’ sometimes needed a long time to be revised, resulting in late publication. In principle, we required the authors to send back the revised manuscript within 2 months when the manuscript was judged as ‘review after revision’. However, 2 months are often insufficient for polishing the manuscript. The category ‘decline, but encourage resubmission’ will be used for manuscripts that contain high originality and/or novelty but need polishing further to complete them. High quality manuscripts that need extra data will be judged in this category. Each cover of PCP will have an illustration selected from one of the articles published in that issue. Authors are welcome to submit a color photograph or illustration for a cover photograph to the Administration Office Center. The image will then be forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief for consideration. If your photograph is selected, you will be contacted by the Editor-in-Chief or the Production Manager. Reprints with the cover photograph will be provided for the authors whose picture or illustration is selected as the cover of a PCP issue. If you have any ideas to develop PCP further as an attractive international scientific journal, I would be glad to hear from you. Fig. 1 Changes in the number of incidences of online access per month. Current data on submission and results of reviewing a As of May 31, 2005. b Figures in parenthese show the number of overseas submissions. Current data on submission and results of reviewing a As of May 31, 2005. b Figures in parenthese show the number of overseas submissions.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,027
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,027
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,141

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0270,020
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,002
Communication savante0,0060,004
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0150,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,035
Tête enseignante GPT0,224
Écart entre enseignants0,189 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2005
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePlant and Cell PhysiologyMême sujetPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesTravaux en français237 207