Instructions for authors

This page provides instructions for authors.

In this course, the writing process is structured in 3 successive stages and associated deadlines:

1. Write an “extended” outline. The outline is due on the Thursday following the presentation. We will discuss it during the consultation hours. Usually, the extended outline has 4-levels: title, sections, subsections, paragraph.
2. Write your manuscript. It is due 2 weeks after the presentation, and should be submitted electronically using the web interface.
3. Revise your manuscript based on the peer-reviews. Your revision is due 1 week after you obtain the peer-reviews.

In the context of this course, a review is a synthesis of a current computational biology research topic. The target readership is students in the computational biology master program. The typical length of a review is between 1800-2000 words.

• LaTeX templates for the course (V1.0)
• LaTeX (Try installing it through your usual package manager first)

Submit your review in PDF format directly on the article management system.

If you have not already, you will need to start by creating an account. Note that you have to explicitly select author and reviewer roles upon registration:

If you missed these options upon registration, you can still activate the author/reviewer roles by changing your profile settings (Home > User > Edit Profile).

Check-list

• Spelling: use automated spell-checker (e.g. ispell) and proofread your text carefully.
• Verify one more time
  • that references are accurate and complete
  • that each claim backed by citation
  • that your narrative is coherent
  • that the article meets editorial policy

• Ask a colleague for feedback on draft (thank for his/her help in Acknowledgement section)

Submit your revision directly on the article management system. Include the following files:

• PDF (typeset by LaTeX with course template)
• LaTeX sources (.tex, .bib, images, and all files required to compile your manuscript)
• Cover letter that explains how you addressed the concerns of the referees (and of the editor, if any).