1. "Advances in Mechanics" published paper form: research review, research Letters, frontier focus, outlook/viewpoint, dynamic information, mechanics field, translation.

2. " Advances in Mechanics" published papers covering various fields of mechanics and related cross-disciplines, focusing on high-level review articles in mechanics field.

3. Factors to consider when accepting articles:

(1) Research review: It has strong correlation to mechanics, publishes review and comments and the authors are actually deeply engaged in the research work of the reviewed topics;

(2) Research Letters: Quickly and briefly, report original and novel scientific research results;

(3) Frontier Focus: Summarize and comment on single research work of recent highlights at home and abroad;

(4) Prospects/Opinions: To publish views and opinions on the research background, latest development, and potential value of a certain research field;

(5) Dynamic information: Introduce the latest information of important scientific and technological information, progress of research project, important conferences and academic activities at home and abroad;

(6) The field of mechanics: Introduces the important figures of mechanics and mechanics institutions at home and abroad;

(7) Translation: Publish and translate foreign classics of high-level mechanics and related subjects.

4. Common reasons for article rejection:

(1) It lacks sufficient mechanical connotation and is not suitable for "Advances in Mechanics";

(2) Lack of important and innovative work;

(3) The research methods and results are not credible, or the basic concepts are wrong, or the main conclusions cannot be supported;

(4) Insufficient interpretation of research results;

(5) The quality of writing is poor;

(6) Other reasons.

5. Review method

Reviewers log on the journal website to review manuscripts online. If there are difficulties in reviewing manuscripts online, they can send the review comments to the editorial department via Email: lxjz@cstam.org.cn, and the manuscript number and the name of the first author should be indicated before the review comments. If there are a large number of mathematical symbols and formulas in the review comments, you can save them as a separate Word or PDF file and submit your review comments via online attachment upload. The online review system has help and answers to frequently asked questions, visible website related content tips.  

6. Review time

In order to ensure articles with academic exchange value to be accepted for publication as soon as possible, reviewers are generally requested to return review comments within 15 days after receiving the manuscript. If there is any difficulty, it can be extended appropriately, and please send a letter to inform. The editing system will automatically send a reminder on the 7th day, and the editorial office will remind manually after 15 days.

7. Peer review process

In order to save the time of authors and reviewers, the editorial office will check all the manuscripts and conduct preliminary review. Articles with little mechanical connotation or content not suitable for "Advances in Mechanics" will be directly rejected and no longer sent for external review. We will send at least two experts for external review of manuscripts that have passed the preliminary review. The manuscripts that have passed the external review will be finalized by the chief and deputy editors and the editorial board. Whether to accept the manuscript will be decided according to the experts' review opinions, the author's modification and the requirements of the journal.  

8. Rereview

In some cases, reviewers will rereview the authors’ revised manuscripts, and the reviewers are asked to make final recommendation on whether to accept or not based on the author’s revision description and modification.

9. Review of the author's appeal manuscript

The editorial office generally sends the author’s appeal draft and appeal description to the original reviewer for re-examination. The original reviewer is requested to respond to the author’s appeal and give clear opinions on the appeal draft. If the author requests to withdraw from the original reviewer, the editorial office may consider adding other reviewers for review, and the editor-in-chief of the final reviewer will make a final decision based on the reviewing opinions of the appealing reviewer.

10. Choice of reviewers

Reviewing experts choice is very important to maintain the academic quality of journals. The editorial choose referees when considering multiple factors, including professional level, credit, academic integrity, auditing comments are detailed, as well as review speed, etc. , we will try to avoid choosing review opinions rough general, reviewing too harsh or loose, reviewing of delay too long time reviewing experts.  

11. Anonymity and information security

A single-blind review system is adopted. During the whole review process, the information of the reviewer is kept confidential to the author. If the reviewer has any inconvenience, the reviewer's comments can be directly entered in the editorial office's comment column on the review page. The reviewer shall keep confidential the experimental data and major academic achievements of the reviewed manuscripts. If there are other colleagues reviewing the manuscript with you, please attach their names and contact information to the review comments and inform the editorial office.  During the review process, do not discuss with the author, but contact the editor to submit the manuscript.