Chairperson Members Ex-Officio members
   K. Kleinknecht    H. Wahl
   D. Cundy
   L. DiLella
   N. Doble
   I. Mannelli
   F. Marchetto
   E. Mazzucato
   B. Peyaud
   A. Ceccucci
   V. Kekelidze
   M. Sozzi

16 December 2004


  1. Receives a paper for consideration from the writer (analyzer or convener). To be considered, a paper must satisfy the agreed rules (two independent analysis or a justified proposal by convener/spokesperson).
  2. Appoints a responsible editor, to follow the paper until publication, and informs the Collaboration. The editor (in agreement with the analyzers and conveners) establishes a tentative timeline for publication, and reports to the collaboration on the advancement of the paper. In accordance with the agreed rules (see corresponding SC documents), for a single analysis the EB also appoints a second person, and together with the editor the two work as referees. Editor/referees are usually chosen among the members of the Editorial Board (EB) but not necessarily.
  3. Editor/referees actively interact with the writer, analysis conveners and other people involved, to introduce necessary corrections, possibly requiring additional work from the analyzer(s), which in case of a single analysis may be substantial.
  4. The editor proposes an improved version of the paper for public consideration (by the whole Collaboration), and establishes the corresponding dead line.
  5. The editor requires the writer to implement the final corrections taking into account public consideration and remarks, makes the final version public to the Collaboration for possible very important comments, then submits the paper for publication.

Publication / Presentation

The following sequence is proposed:

  1. Note [mandatory for 1 analysis only]
  2. CERN seminar [optional]
  3. CERN preprint
  4. e-Print archive
  5. Journal