This page contains information on the peer review process for the Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society.
For information on submitting to the Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society, see the submission guidelines, or find out what happens to an article after it is accepted.
Peer review principles
Articles published in the Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society undergo peer review before acceptance.
The Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society operates a single-anonymous peer review process. This means that:
- Reviewer identity is not made visible to author
- Author identity is visible to reviewer
- Reviewer and author identity are both visible to the editor
The reviewers interact only with the editor and/or journal team. Reviewers do not interact with each other or with the authors.
Information about the editors of the Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society can be found on the journal’s homepage.
In accordance with the London Mathematical Society’s Ethical Policy for Journals, articles submitted to the Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society are assessed on their intellectual content without regard to sex, gender identity, disability, age, nationality, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, belief system, neurodiversity, political philosophy, or socioeconomic status.
The peer review process
1) Assessment by editor
Submissions are initially assessed by an editor, who determines whether the paper is suitable for further consideration by the journal. Submissions may be rejected by the editor at this stage, if they are judged to be unsuitable.
2) (Optional) Expert advice
The editor may send the submission to one or more independent experts in the field. The expert(s) will advise the editor whether, in their opinion, the paper is likely to meet the mathematical and editorial standards of the Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society. Taking into account any expert advice received, the editor decides whether to proceed with peer review. The editor may ask the author(s) to revise their paper based on the advice of the expert(s) and submissions may be rejected at this stage.
3) Full peer review
The editor will obtain an in‐depth report on the paper from one or more reviewers.
4) Editorial decision
Following the reviewer's report, the editor and section editor (and occasionally the managing editors) will collectively make a final decision to accept the paper (possibly subject to minor revisions), request the author make substantial revisions addressing the comments of the reviewers, or reject the paper.
5) Revisions
If revisions are requested, the editor may obtain further reports from the reviewers about the revisions before returning to stage 5.
Manuscript transfer
If an article is not accepted for publication in the Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society, we may offer the author the opportunity to transfer their submission to other suitable journals published by the London Mathematical Society.
The offer to transfer is made at the discretion of the editors, and may be made prior to or after full peer review.
Authors may accept or decline the offer to transfer. If the offer is accepted after peer review, then the paper will be transferred along with any advice or reviewer reports obtained during the review process.
Peer review times
The Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society aims to provide a fair, rigorous and efficient peer review process. Editors strive to review papers with the least possible delay, but it can take time to find volunteers who are both able and willing to review papers. In doing so, the editors must balance respect and consideration for the experts and reviewers who freely volunteer their time and effort, with the needs and expectations of authors.
If a submission is to be rejected from the Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society, the editors aim to do so at the earliest opportunity so that the authors may choose to submit to an alternative journal. The final decision time will vary depending on the length of the paper and the subject area.
On rare occasions, editors may be unable to find suitable reviewers, or be unable to obtain a report from a reviewer long after the agreed deadline has passed. In such circumstances, as a last resort, the editor may offer the author the option to withdraw the paper and submit it elsewhere. Authors maintain the right to withdraw the current version of their article at any time during the review process.
Solutions to famous problems
Some famous open problems or theorems result in large numbers of submissions with flawed proofs. Submissions purporting to solve these problems will only be considered if the argument is exceptionally clear, complete and precise. Submissions which appear implausible are rejected quickly. It is incumbent upon authors to provide convincing proofs, and not upon the journal to find errors.
Research integrity checks
The Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society may use third-party tools to screen submissions for research integrity issues, including plagiarism, duplicate submission, or similarity with fraudulent paper mill submissions.
Appeals
Authors are entitled to appeal against a rejection decision made by a journal where it is clear that the decision was based on a factual error in the review process. Decisions based on editorial judgement of novelty or significance may not be appealed.
More information on the appeals process can be found in the Ethical Policy for Journals.
Neutrality
Publication of individual authors' work in the Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society does not constitute endorsement by the London Mathematical Society of the policies or actions of any government or other agencies.
