Author Guidelines
& Submission Policy

1  Aims and Scope

The Journal publishes rigorous, original scholarship produced by pre-collegiate and early-career researchers. It exists to give serious student work a credible venue and a genuine review process, held to the same standards of clarity, honesty, and evidence that govern professional publishing. We value careful reasoning and well-documented methods over novelty for its own sake.

We welcome computational studies, quantitative analyses of secondary data, systematic and narrative reviews, methodological and dataset contributions, applied technical work, case studies, and evidence-based policy analysis. Every field is in scope provided the argument is disciplined and the claims are supported. Manuscripts are judged on the soundness of the method, the transparency of the reporting, and the strength of the reasoning that connects evidence to conclusions.

The Journal does not conduct or accept work involving wet-laboratory experimentation, clinical trials, direct recruitment of human participants, or procedures on animals. Research must be conducted with publicly available data, ethically obtained secondary data, computational models, simulation, or theoretical analysis. Section 7 sets out these limits in full.

2  Article Types and Length

Select one article type at submission. The type determines the expected structure, the length, and the checklist your manuscript must satisfy. Word counts refer to the main text and exclude the title page, abstract, references, tables, figure captions, and supplementary material.

Requests to exceed a length ceiling must be made to the editorial office before submission and will be granted only where the additional length is justified by the material.

3  Editorial Principles

Four commitments govern how the Journal evaluates and publishes work.

• Integrity first. A finding is only worth publishing if it is honestly obtained and honestly reported. We would rather publish a modest result described accurately than an ambitious one that overreaches its evidence.
• Transparency of method. A reader should be able to trace every claim back to its source and, where feasible, reproduce the analysis. Methods and materials are reported in full.
• Fair and constructive review. Manuscripts are assessed on their merits by reviewers briefed to be rigorous and instructive. Feedback is meant to strengthen the work and the author.
• Accessibility. Published articles are free to read. Clear writing is a condition of acceptance, because scholarship that cannot be understood cannot be used.

4  Manuscript Preparation

4.1 File format and submission

Submit the manuscript as a single editable file in Microsoft Word (.docx) or as LaTeX source with a compiled PDF. Do not submit a read-only PDF as the primary file. Embed figures within the manuscript at first submission so reviewers can read the work as a whole, and be prepared to supply figures as separate high-resolution files on acceptance. Name the file with the lead author surname and a short title, for example Rossi_benzene_emissions.docx.

Prepare a fully anonymized version if you are submitting to a double-anonymized review track. Remove author names, affiliations, acknowledgements, funding details, and any self-identifying statements from the manuscript, and strip identifying metadata from the file.

4.2 General formatting

The formatting below applies to the manuscript you submit for review. Accepted articles are typeset by the Journal, so you do not need to reproduce the final published layout. Consistency matters more than decoration.

4.3 Title page

The title page is the first page of the manuscript and carries the metadata the editorial office needs. Include, in order: the article type; the full title; the author list; institutional affiliations keyed by superscript to each author; ORCID identifiers where available; and the corresponding author with a contact email. A good title is specific and informative. It states the subject and, where possible, the finding or the method, and it avoids questions, jargon, and unexplained abbreviations.

Author order signals contribution and must be agreed by all authors before submission. Mark equal contributions with a symbol and a note. The corresponding author is responsible for communication with the Journal and for confirming that every listed author has approved the submission. See Section 9 for the criteria that qualify a person as an author.

4.4 Abstract and keywords

The abstract is the most widely read part of any paper, so write it last and write it well. It must stand alone, without reference to the main text, and must contain no citations, figures, tables, or undefined abbreviations. State the problem, what you did, what you found, and what it means. For Original Research and Review articles, use a structured abstract with the headings Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusion. Respect the word ceiling for your article type given in Section 2.

Supply three to eight keywords below the abstract, separated by semicolons. Choose terms a reader would actually search for. Make them specific enough to distinguish your work and broad enough to place it in a field, and do not simply repeat words already in the title.

4.5 Main text and section structure

Original Research follows the standard scientific structure: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion. Other article types adapt this sensibly; a review is organized by theme, and a technical report by component or stage. Whatever the structure, each section has one job. The Introduction motivates the question and states the objective. The Methods describe what was done in enough detail to be repeated. The Results report what was found without interpreting it. The Discussion interprets the findings and states their limits. The Conclusion delivers the single most important takeaway.

4.6 Headings, numbering, and cross-references

Number sections decimally and refer to them by number in the text, for example “as described in Section 2.3.” Number tables, figures, and equations in the order they first appear, and refer to every one of them in the text at least once. Number references in citation order as described in Section 6. Keep the numbering scheme consistent throughout; a manuscript that cites Figure 4 before Figure 3 will be returned for correction.

4.7 Language, style, and voice

Write in clear, formal English. Prefer short declarative sentences to long qualified ones. Use the past tense for what you did and found, and the present tense for established facts and for what the data show. The first person is acceptable and often clearer than strained passive constructions. Define every term and abbreviation at first use. Above all, be precise: say exactly what you mean, quantify where you can, and do not reach for a claim your evidence does not support.

4.8 Numbers, units, and nomenclature

Use SI units and the standard symbols for them. Place a space between a number and its unit, for example 5 kg and 20 °C, with the exception of the degree symbol for angles and the percent sign. Report numbers to a precision the measurement supports, and do not carry more significant figures than the data warrant. Define any specialized nomenclature, gene or software names, or discipline-specific notation the first time it appears.

4.9 Abbreviations

Keep abbreviations to a minimum, because each one asks the reader to remember something. Define an abbreviation at first use by giving the full term followed by the abbreviation in parentheses, then use the abbreviation consistently thereafter. Do not abbreviate a term used only once or twice. Provide a short abbreviations list in the back matter when the manuscript uses more than a handful.

4.10 Mathematics and equations

Present displayed equations on their own line and number them consecutively in parentheses at the right margin, for example (1). Define every symbol at or near its first appearance, and state the units of any dimensional quantity. Use a consistent notation throughout, and prefer standard mathematical typesetting to inline plain-text approximations. Where a derivation is long, place the full working in supplementary material and keep the main text to the key steps and the result.

5  Figures and Tables

Figures and tables carry the evidence, so they must be legible, self-explanatory, and honest. A reader should be able to understand each one from its caption without hunting through the text. Every figure and table must be cited in the text and numbered in order of first mention.

6  Citations and References

The Journal uses the Vancouver system: references are numbered in the order they first appear in the text, and each in-text citation is a superscript number placed after the punctuation. Cite the source of every fact, figure, quotation, and idea that is not your own or common knowledge. Cite the primary source you actually consulted, not a source you found cited elsewhere. List every reference once, in a single numbered list at the end, in citation order.

Example in text. Refinery emissions of benzene declined after the 2019 remediation program.¹²

Include a DOI for every source that has one. List all authors up to six; for seven or more, list the first six followed by “et al.” Reference-management software is strongly encouraged, but you remain responsible for the accuracy of every entry.

7  Research Ethics

7.1 Permissible research

The Journal publishes only work that could be conducted safely and ethically by a student researcher without specialized oversight. Acceptable sources include public datasets, government and institutional records, published literature, computational models and simulations, and secondary data that were ethically collected and lawfully obtained. The Journal does not accept wet-laboratory experiments, clinical trials, the direct recruitment of human participants, the collection of private identifiable information, or any procedure involving animals. If your project falls outside these limits, it is not a fit for the Journal regardless of its quality.

7.2 Human data, privacy, and consent

Where a study uses data about people, the author must protect those people. Do not report information that could identify an individual unless that information is already lawfully public and its use causes no harm. Aggregate or de-identify data wherever possible. If a project draws on data that were originally collected with the consent of participants, describe the basis on which you are permitted to use them. The burden is on the author to show that the use is lawful and that no individual is placed at risk.

7.3 Secondary and publicly available data

Publicly available does not mean unconditionally usable. Check the license or terms of use of every dataset, and comply with them. Attribute the source. Do not combine datasets in a way that re-identifies individuals who were anonymous in each source alone. State clearly where the data came from and when they were accessed, because datasets change over time.

7.4 Required ethics statement

Every manuscript must include an ethics statement in the back matter. If the work used only public or properly licensed secondary data and involved no human participants, state that ethical approval was not required and explain why. If any human data were involved, describe the source, the consent basis, and the steps taken to protect privacy. A manuscript without an ethics statement is incomplete and will be returned.

8  Data, Code, and Reproducibility

Reproducibility is not a formality; it is what separates a result from an assertion. The Journal expects authors to make it possible for a competent reader to check and rebuild their work.

Data availability. Every manuscript includes a data availability statement. Where possible, deposit the data in a public repository that issues a persistent identifier such as a DOI, and cite that identifier. If the data are already public, give the exact source and access date. If data cannot be shared, state the specific reason and explain how a reader could obtain or reconstruct them.

Code and analysis. If the results depend on code, share it. Provide a repository link or supplementary archive containing the scripts, the software versions, and enough instruction to reproduce the analysis from the raw data. Report the computing environment where it affects the result.

Materials and protocols. Describe any model architecture, search string, inclusion criterion, or processing step precisely enough to be repeated. A method a reader cannot follow is a method the Journal cannot publish.

9  Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship is a statement of responsibility, not a reward for association. The Journal follows the four criteria of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. To be listed as an author, a person must meet all four:

• Made a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the data.
• Drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content.
• Approved the final version to be published.
• Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work, including the integrity and accuracy of any part of it.

A person who contributed but does not meet all four criteria should be named in the Acknowledgements, not the author list. Contributing funding, supplying data, or supervising a program does not by itself qualify a person as an author. Every author must be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for which parts of the work.

Record each author's specific role using the CRediT taxonomy in the Author Contributions statement:

Changes to authorship

The author list is fixed at submission. Any request to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must come from the corresponding author, must state the reason, and must be accompanied by the written agreement of every author, including the one being added or removed. The editors may decline a change they cannot verify.

10  Research Integrity and Publication Ethics

The Journal treats research integrity as non-negotiable. The following are serious violations and are grounds for immediate rejection or, after publication, for correction or retraction.

• Fabrication and falsification. Inventing data or results, or altering data, images, or methods so that the work no longer reflects what was actually done.
• Plagiarism. Presenting another person's words, ideas, data, or figures as your own. This includes close paraphrase without attribution and reuse of your own previously published text without disclosure. All submissions are screened for similarity.
• Duplicate or concurrent submission. Submitting work that has been published elsewhere, or submitting the same manuscript to another venue at the same time.
• Image manipulation. Editing an image in a way that misrepresents the underlying data, as described in Section 5.
• Undisclosed conflicts. Failing to declare a competing interest that a reasonable reader would want to know about.

Where a concern is raised, the editors investigate in line with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors are given a fair opportunity to respond. If a published article is found to contain an honest error, the Journal issues a correction. If its findings or conclusions are unreliable, the Journal issues a retraction with a clear explanation. The aim is to keep the published record accurate, not to punish; but deliberate misconduct is reported to the author's institution.

11  Use of Artificial Intelligence

Generative and assistive artificial intelligence tools may be used, within limits, and must be disclosed. The principle is simple: a tool can help you produce the work, but it cannot be responsible for it. Authors are accountable for every word, figure, number, and citation in the manuscript, whatever produced the first draft.

An AI tool cannot be an author, because it cannot take responsibility for the work or approve its publication. Do not list any AI system in the author line or the contributor list.

You must disclose AI use in an AI Use Statement in the back matter. Name the tool, state what it was used for (for example, drafting, editing, translation, code generation, or literature summarization), and confirm that a human author reviewed and verified the output. If no AI tools were used, say so explicitly.

Verify everything an AI tool produces. These tools invent citations, misstate facts, and introduce subtle errors. A fabricated reference or an unchecked statistic in your manuscript is your error, not the tool's, and it will be treated as such.

12  Competing Interests

A competing interest is anything that could be seen to influence the work or its reporting, whether or not it actually did. It may be financial, such as funding, employment, or a commercial relationship, or non-financial, such as a personal or institutional affiliation with a stake in the outcome. Declare all competing interests in the manuscript. If there are none, state that the authors declare no competing interests. Disclosure does not disqualify a manuscript; concealment does.

13  Funding

State the source of any funding that supported the work, using the funder's full name and any grant or award number. Describe the funder's role in the study, or state that the funder had no role in the design, analysis, writing, or decision to submit. If the work received no specific funding, use the standard statement: this research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

14  Peer Review

Every submission is first checked by the editorial office for scope, completeness, and formatting. Manuscripts that pass this check are sent to at least two reviewers with relevant knowledge, under a double-anonymized model in which authors and reviewers are not told each other's identities. Reviewers assess the significance of the question, the soundness of the method, the support for the claims, the clarity of the writing, and the treatment of ethics and data.

Reviewers recommend one of four outcomes: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject. The editors weigh the reviews and make the decision, which they communicate with the reviewers' comments. Most published articles go through at least one round of revision. Typical time from submission to first decision is stated on the submission portal. Reviewers are expected to be rigorous and constructive, and to treat every manuscript as confidential.

15  Copyright, Licensing, and Access

Authors retain copyright in their work. On acceptance, authors grant the Journal a license to publish and distribute the article, and the article is published open access under a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0). Under this license anyone may read, share, and build on the article provided the authors are credited. Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reuse any third-party material and for ensuring that such reuse is compatible with the article's license. There is no charge to authors to submit or to publish.

16  After a Decision

Revisions

Return a revised manuscript with two files: the revised version, and a point-by-point response that addresses every reviewer comment and states what changed and where. Mark the changes in the manuscript so the editors can see them quickly. A revision that does not respond to the reviewers will be returned.

Appeals

If you believe a decision rests on a clear misunderstanding of the work, you may appeal once. Write to the editorial office with a specific, reasoned explanation. Appeals are considered by an editor who was not responsible for the original decision. A disagreement with the reviewers' judgment is not, by itself, grounds for appeal.

Corrections after publication

If you discover an error in a published article, tell the editorial office promptly. The Journal will assess it and, where warranted, publish a correction linked to the original article. The published record is kept accurate and transparent.

17  Pre-Submission Checklist

Confirm every item below before you submit. A submission missing any required element will be returned without review.

• The article type is selected and the manuscript matches its structure and length.
• The title page includes all authors, affiliations, ORCID identifiers where available, and the corresponding author's email.
• The abstract stands alone, respects the word limit, and contains no citations or abbreviations. Three to eight keywords are provided.
• The main text is double-spaced with continuous line numbers and decimal section numbering.
• Every figure and table is cited in the text, numbered in order, and has a self-contained caption.
• References follow the Vancouver format, are numbered in citation order, and include DOIs where available.
• An ethics statement, a data availability statement, and an AI use statement are included in the back matter.
• Competing interests and funding are declared.
• Author contributions are recorded using the CRediT taxonomy, and all authors have approved the submission.
• Data and code are deposited or available, and the manuscript says how to access them.
• The manuscript has been checked for language, accuracy of citations, and internal consistency of numbering.

18  Editorial Contact

Direct questions about scope, submission, or these guidelines to the editorial office. Submit manuscripts through the Journal's submission portal.

These guidelines are reviewed annually. Authors are bound by the version in force on the date of submission.