Information for Authors of Submissions to TBIOM
Every manuscript submitted to TBIOM must
- Provide a clear statement of the problem addressed by the work, and of how the work is a novel improvement on the known state of the art. (This is typically done in the Introduction and the Literature Review.)
- Not be previously published or under review elsewhere. (See explanation below for extensions of previously-published conference papers.)
- Have all listed authors agreed to the authorship list and all the contents and confirm that the work is original and that figures, tables and other reported results accurately reflect the experimental work.
- Provide unbiased citation of the most closely related and the most recent related work that addresses the same or a similar problem, and explain how the paper improves on these works.
- Not gratuitously cite the authors’ own previous works, relative to other works.
A paper is a candidate for an Immediate Rejection if it is of limited novelty, e.g. a straightforward combination of theories and algorithms that are well established, and are repeated on a known scenario. Papers that have a large number of typographical and/or grammatical errors will also be rejected without review (but may be re-submitted after editing). English language editing services can help refine the language of your article and reduce the risk of rejection without review. IEEE authors are eligible for discounts at several language editing services; visit the IEEE Author Center to learn more. Please note these services are fee-based and do not guarantee acceptance.
Experimental contributions will be rejected without review if there is insufficient or out-of-date experimental data. The normal expectation is that the dataset on which the main results in a submission are based on will be available to the general research community. If the main results in a submission are based on a dataset that is not available to the research community, this fact must be clearly explained and justified in the submission and in the cover letter to the submission, so that it can be taken into account by the reviewers and the Associate Editor during the review process.
Extensions of conference papers may be submitted to TBIOM. Conference papers serve as the basis for a more fully developed TBIOM publication. When this is the case, the TBIOM submission must cite the previous publication, must be a “substantial revision” of the previous publication, and must explain the extension and enhancement of the TBIOM submission over the conference publication. Failure to include the citation and explanation of the extension and enhancement is grounds for Rejection without review. As implied in the previous sentences, the conference paper and the TBIOM submission cannot be identical. As a general rule, the TBIOM submission should contain at least 30% new material. The new material should correspond to content that is a clear extension and enhancement of the results in the conference paper. For example, the TBIOM submission paper may include more extensive experimental validation, additional analysis in support of the conclusions, novel algorithmic enhancements, added theoretical work, additional technical details, a clearer explanation of the contribution, an updated state-of-the-art or other enhancements. The Editors and the Reviewers will judge the novelty and importance of the content that is unique to the TBIOM submission.
Regular, Short and Survey Papers
Authors are encouraged to submit manuscripts of Regular papers, Short papers, or Survey papers.
- Short papers may provide a concise new result, or may provide comment on a previously published paper.
- Regular papers are up to 10 pages in length, and Short papers are up to 6 pages in length.
- Survey papers are up to 16 pages in length.
Pages in excess of these limits after final layout of the accepted manuscript is complete are subject to IEEE’s normal Mandatory Overlength Page Charges (MOPC). All supplemental material must be submitted as separate files and must not be included within the same PDF file as the main paper submission. There is no page limit on supplemental files.
Double-anonymous Submission: TBIOM allows double-anonymous submission, if the authors choose to do so.
Conflict resolution and appeal process: During paper submission, authors should declare conflict of interest, if any, with the EiC, Associate EiCs, and AE.
- In case there is an appeal by the authors against the decision, the EiC should re-quest one of the non-conflicting Associate EiC to review the paper and reviews,and provide his/her feedback. The AEiC and EiC can jointly take the decision.
- If the authors raise further appeal, it should be escalated to the VP Publicationswho can look into the matter. If required, consultation can be sought from thePublications Committee.
- The final escalation can be made to the President of the Biometrics Council,whose decision should be final.
- In case of conflict with the EiC, the first escalation is handled by VP Publicationsalong with the Associate EiC.
Paper Publication and Availability: IEEE T-BIOM follows a quarterly cycle for paper publication. All the papers accepted in IEEE T-BIOM will be made available from the IEEE Xplore, Papers are made available on Xplore through Early access soon after the acceptance and are also archived through Xplore only.
Policy Regarding Arxiv Papers
TBIOM policy toward submissions citing papers on Arxiv is described below. (This policy originates from discussion and vote in the PAMI TC and use by the CVPR 2016 Program Chairs.)
How should I treat arXiv papers?
ArXiv papers are not considered prior work since they have not been peer reviewed. Therefore, you should treat TBIOM submissions independently as if the ArXiv papers didn’t exist. Citations to these papers are not required and failing to cite or beat performance of arXiv papers are not grounds for rejection. For example:
- It is Not OK for a reviewer to suggest rejection for not citing an arXiv paper or not being better than something on arXiv.
- It is Not OK to accept a paper solely because it performs better than something on arXiv.
- It is Not OK to reject a paper solely because it performs worse than something on arXiv.
- It is Not OK to regard arXiv as a standard for the state of the art, because it is not reviewed. This applies *whoever* wrote the arXiv paper.
- It is Not OK for a reviewer to reject a paper solely because another paper with a similar idea has already appeared on arXiv. If the reviewer is worried about plagiarism they should bring this up in confidential comments to the Associate Editor.
- It is OK for a reviewer to suggest an author should acknowledge and be aware of something on arXiv.
- It is OK for an author to decline to acknowledge something on arXiv (because it has not been reviewed and so may not be right).
IEEE TBIOM Publications Ethics and Malpractice Statement
IEEE Transaction on Biometrics, Behavior and Identity Science is the flagship journal of IEEE Biometrics Council, which is a not-for-profit organization. Based on the IEEE governance guidelines , the IEEE Biometrics council abides by the nondiscrimination policy: “IEEE prohibits discrimination, harassment, and bullying against any person for any reason—for example, because of age, ancestry, color, disability or handicap, national origin, race, religion, gender, sexual or affectional orientation, gender identity, appearance, matriculation, political affiliation, marital status, veteran status, or any other characteristic protected by law.” T-BIOM would also strictly abide by the nondiscrimination policy.
Paper Publication Process
T-BIOM paper publication process involves: (i) author; (ii) EiC; (iii) AEs and (iv) reviewers. In addition, there are other publication members and editorial staff that are involved who abide by the IEEE guidelines. In addition to the nondiscrimination policy, there are ethics guideline for four groups involved with the T-BIOM paper publication process
Author Responsibilities: Authorship, Plagiarism and Ethics
A paper submitted to T-BIOM starts with the authors. The authors need to be fully aware of their responsibilities as per IEEE author responsibilities  and ethics guideline.
Key responsibilities of the author include:
- Accurately report research findings.
- Ensure article meets all publication requirements and adheres to ethical standards.
- Revise article as per reviewers’ suggestions (or give a reason why not).
Key points from  are provide below verbatim for quick reference.
IEEE considers individuals who meet all of the following criteria to be authors:
- Made a significant intellectual contribution to the theoretical development, system or experimental design, prototype development, and/or the analysis and interpretation of data associated with the work contained in the article.
- Contributed to drafting the article or reviewing and/or revising it for intellectual content
- Approved the final version of the article as accepted for publication, including references.
In addition to all of the authorship criteria described above, the corresponding author is also responsible for:
- Including as co-authors all persons appropriate and none inappropriate.
- Obtaining from all co-authors their assent to be designated as such, as well as their approval of the final version of the article as accepted for publication.
- Keeping all co-authors apprised of the current status of an article submitted for publication. This includes furnishing all co-authors with copies of the reviewers’ comments and a copy of the published version, as appropriate.
The authors should always cite any sources used in your journal article. Citation is required in several instances. Follow these guidelines.
- Direct quotation: Place verbatim text from another source in quotation marks. Indent text for longer quotes. Include a citation to the original source.
- Paraphrase or summary: Include a citation when restating or summarizing information from another source, including ideas, processes, arguments, or conclusions.
- Data, research results, information, graphics, or tables: Cite the original source when referring to, adapting, or reusing any information from another source.
Note that the same rules apply to your own previously published work. When in doubt, cite.
IEEE defines plagiarism as the use of another’s ideas, processes, results, or words without explicitly acknowledging the original author and source. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable and is considered a serious breach of professional conduct, with potentially severe ethical and legal consequences.All IEEE journal, magazine, and conference articles are screened for plagiarism before publication.
Citing an irrelevant source for the purpose of artificially inflating citation metrics is considered a breach of ethics. Only cite relevant sources that legitimately contribute to your article according to the criteria outlined above.
Readers of your article rely on you to communicate your research findings fully and report your data accurately. Ensure authors are showing the full picture by avoiding fabrication, falsification, and image manipulation during your research and when you are writing or revising your article.
Peer review is a system based on trust. Each party relies on the others to operate professionally, ethically, and confidentially. Learn about the ethical responsibilities of the reviewer, the author, and the publication during peer review. Details are available in .
Responsibilities of the Reviewer
- Provide a prompt, thorough, and impartial review of the article.
- Give constructive feedback with reasonable suggestions and professional tone.
- Avoid suggesting the addition of irrelevant or unnecessary references.
- Alert the editor to any suspected ethical issues.
- Maintain confidentiality by safeguarding the unique contributions of the author’s work.
TBIOM Operating Process
- Editor-in-Chief evaluates the submission for a basic sanity check and scope of the paper, if found satisfactory, will pass it on to one of the Associate Editor-in-Chiefs (depending on workload and expertise). The Associate Editor-in-Chief will review the submission and if found suitable, will assign an Associate Editor to manage the review process.
- Associate Editor will invite reviewers and as soon as the required number of reviews are available, she/he will recommend one of the decisions: Accept, Accept with minor/mandatory revisions, Revise and Resubmit (Major Revision), Reject.
- The final decision will be taken by the EiC.
Policy Regarding Databases with Human Subjects
Informed consent, protection of privacy, and other human rights are further criteria against which manuscripts involving human subjects will be judged if dataset was collected and used in the research. Papers describing investigations on human subjects must include a statement that the study was approved by the appropriate institutional review board. The approval of data collection protocol should be disclosed in the manuscript clearly in unambiguous manner. Any dataset that has been made unavailable by the authors should not be used.
The IEEE Publication Services and Products Board (PSPB) Operations Manual, Section 8.1.1.B and 8.1.1.E., state: “Authors of articles reporting on research involving human subjects or animals shall confirm upon submission of an article to the Editor whether or not an approval was obtained from a relevant Review Board (or equivalent local/regional review). If such an approval was obtained, the original source and reference shall be provided to the Editor at the time of submission and shall appear in the article.”
During the submission process, the author will be asked: “Did this research involve human subjects dataset collected during this research?”. If the author answers Yes, he/she will be then asked: “If yes, was approval obtained from a relevant review board (or local/regional equivalent)?” with possible responses  “Yes. All approval details must be described in detail in the box below, as well as included in the manuscript.” or  “Not applicable. This research is exempt. The reasoning or details of exemption must be detailed in the box below as well as included in the manuscript.” A text box is provided, in which the author can enter the requested details. The following information should be included in both the text box and the manuscript itself: name of the institution, name of the IRB/IACUC/ethics board that determined the approval or exemption and date of approval/exemption.
If no tests on human subjects are reported in the paper, the authors should select “Not applicable: This submission does not include human or animal research” and thus there is no need of ethics approval.
Requirements for Informed Consent
Research that relies on human subjects or animal experimentation typically is overseen by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and is guided by internationally recognized conventions for the protection of human subjects and standards for animal research.
IEEE requires that authors of articles reporting on research involving human subjects or animals, including but extending beyond medical research, shall include a statement in the manuscript that the research was performed under the oversight of an institutional review board or equivalent local/regional body, including the official name of the IRB/ethics committee, or include an explanation as to why such a review was not conducted. This statement will be also included in the published version of the article.
For research involving human subjects, authors shall also report that consent from the human subjects to (1) participate in the research and (2) to allow for publication of the research was obtained–or explain why consent was not obtained. When submitting an article, authors shall disclose if the article reports on research using human subjects or animals and, if so, shall provide the information described above.