Photonics Insights
Co-Editors-in-Chief:
Lei Zhou, Fudan University, China
Din Ping Tsai, City University of Hong Kong, China
Photonics Insights is a peer-reviewed, Diamond Open Access, quarterly journal, co-published by Chinese Laser Press (CLP) and SPIE. It covers the traditional core subjects of the field, such as laser optics, quantum optics, nonlinear optics, optical communication and sensing, imaging, nanophotonics, and near-field optics, as well as the intersection of optics and photonics.
On the cover: “Optical bound states in the continuum in periodic structures: mechanisms, effects, and applications,” by Jiajun Wang, Peishen Li, Xingqi Zhao, Zhiyuan Qian, Xinhao Wang, Feifan Wang, Xinyi Zhou, Dezhuan Han, Chao Peng, Lei Shi, and Jian Zi.
Author Guidelines
Most articles in Photonics Insights are by invitation. Authors wishing to submit a review article without invitation should contact the editorial office in advance for additional instructions. Email: pi@clp.ac.cn
Publication Policies
The following requirements will permit you to determine if you can submit a paper to Photonics Insights.
Rights and Permissions: Prior to submission, authors should obtain all clearances, authorizations, and licenses needed for submission and publication. Upon acceptance, authors are required to complete a license authorizing SPIE and CLP to publish the paper under a Creative Commons license.
Significance: Contributions should be substantial and significant in content. We may decline to publish papers that report only incremental progress. Although a paper may be correct and appropriate for Photonics Insights, if it does not demonstrate, in the estimation of the reviewers and editor, sufficient new and important information to warrant publication, or provide a comprehensive review of the current state of the art, it will be declined. Manuscripts that are commercial in nature will not be considered.
Originality: Papers should describe the original work of the authors that has not been previously published in a refereed journal and is not currently under consideration for publication in another refereed journal. Photonics Insights does not allow or sanction duplicate or concurrent submissions of a paper to more than one peer-reviewed journal. Any copying of text, figures, data, or results of other authors without giving credit is defined as plagiarism and is a breach of professional ethics. Such papers will be rejected and other penalties may be assessed.
SPIE Guidelines for Ethical Publishing
Authors are expected to read and abide by the Guidelines for Ethical Publishing.
SPIE is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Authorship
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the research study. All those who have made significant contributions should be offered the opportunity to be listed as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the study should be acknowledged, but not identified as authors. The sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
All collaborators share some degree of responsibility for any paper they coauthor. Some coauthors have responsibility for the entire paper as an accurate, verifiable, report of the research. These include, for example, coauthors who are accountable for the integrity of the critical data reported in the paper, carry out the analysis, write the manuscript, present major findings at conferences, or provide scientific leadership for junior colleagues.
Coauthors who make specific, limited, contributions to a paper are responsible for them, but may have only limited responsibility for other results. While not all coauthors may be familiar with all aspects of the research presented in their paper, all collaborations should have in place an appropriate process for reviewing and ensuring the accuracy and validity of the reported results, and all coauthors should be aware of this process.
Every coauthor should have the opportunity to review the manuscript before its submission. All coauthors have an obligation to provide prompt retractions or correction of errors in published works. Any individual unwilling or unable to accept appropriate responsibility for a paper should not be a coauthor.
Because authorship attribution requires accountability for the submitted work, Photonics Insights does not allow ChatGPT and other Large Language Models (LLMs) to be listed as an author on a manuscript. If authors use AI tools when writing a manuscript, it must be disclosed along with all other tools used in the study in the Materials and Methods section of the paper. This section should describe which AI tool was used and how it was used. Photonics Insights follows the guidance of COPE on this topic, which further advises that “Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by an AI tool, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics.”
Collaborations are expected to have a process to archive and verify the research record; to facilitate internal communication and allow all authors to be fully aware of the entire work; and respond to questions concerning the joint work and enable other responsible scientists to share the data. All members of a collaboration should be familiar with, and understand, the process.
For guidance on preventing and resolving authorship problems, see “How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researchers” (a resource from the Committee on Publication Ethics).
Plagiarism Screening
SPIE defines plagiarism as the reuse of someone else's prior ideas, processes, results, or words without explicit attribution of the original author and source. Unauthorized use of another researcher’s unpublished data or findings without permission is considered to be a form of plagiarism even if the source is attributed. SPIE considers plagiarism in any form, at any level, to be unacceptable and a serious breach of professional conduct.
to detect instances of overlapping and similar text in submitted manuscripts. Crossref Similarity Check is a multipublisher initiative to screen published and submitted content for originality.
Peer Review Process
All submissions are screened to ensure they meet basic standards of manuscript presentation and are also processed through Crossref Similarity Check. Manuscripts are then evaluated by the editor-in-chief (EiC) and/or a designated editorial board member (EBM) to ensure they meet the journal's rigorous scientific standards and are eligible for peer review. Manuscripts that meet these criteria are reviewed (single-anonymous) by at least two referees selected by the EBM based on their expertise in the topic. The referees provide detailed comments and recommendations to help the EBM arrive at the appropriate editorial decision. Revised manuscripts are evaluated by the EBM and are sent back to the original referees in the case of major revisions. The EiC has the ultimate authority to accept or reject a submission.
Authors may appeal to the EBM or EiC to reconsider a rejection decision if they believe that the reviewers have seriously misjudged the manuscript. All appeals will be given careful consideration. The EBM and/or EiC will determine if further consideration is merited or if the original decision should stand.
Submissions from editors or members of the editorial board are handled by an editorial board member who is not connected with the manuscript to ensure that such submissions receive an objective and unbiased evaluation. Information about the review process for such submissions is redacted from the view of any editors or editorial board members who are authors of the paper within the journal's online submission and review system.
Corrections and Retractions
As a publisher, SPIE has an obligation to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record, and will make changes to published articles in certain circumstances, as described here.
Errata
An erratum describes corrections to a published paper resulting from errors with data or interpretation, omissions of information, or any other technical error. An erratum may be initiated by the author, a reader, or an editor, but must have the author’s approval. These statements are published separately from the original paper and include a citation to the original article. When an erratum is published, the original work will also, whenever possible, be corrected and republished with a Corrected date on the PDF, which helps to prevent future duplication of the error.
Any changes to the author list post-publication require approval from all authors and the Co-Editors in Chief, and are at the discretion of the Publisher.
Publisher’s Note
When an error in a paper is initiated by the publisher, such as something inadvertently introduced during copyediting or typesetting, and the error impacts the integrity of the article, a Publisher’s Note may be issued. In this case, the original article will be corrected and republished online with a Corrected date on the PDF. The Publisher’s Note will describe the change and include a citation and link to the original article.
Retraction
Retractions can be initiated by a journal editor, author, publisher, or an author’s institution. The journal editor may consider retraction if they have clear evidence that the paper’s findings are unreliable, either as a result of a major error, or as a result of fabrication or falsification. Other reasons for retraction include plagiarism; previously reported findings, without proper attribution; unauthorized data or material; copyright infringement; unethical research involving human or animal subjects; work published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process; the authors failed to disclose a significant conflict of interest; or egregious dishonesty surrounding authorship, including paid authorship or listing authors without their permission. These reasons for retraction are in line with the Council of Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on retraction.
In the case of retraction, the PDF of the original paper will be republished with a “Retracted” watermark across all pages, and the word “Retracted” will be added to the paper title. The online version of the article will be replaced by a retraction notice that includes the full citation of the original paper and the reason the paper is retracted. The retraction notice will effectively replace the original paper, with the same DOI and citation information.
Prior to retraction, authors will be given an opportunity to respond and appeal, but retraction does not require unanimous agreement of the authors.
Name Changes
In support of diversity, equity, and inclusion in research communities, SPIE allows authors to change their names. Authors may wish to change a name due to gender identity, marriage, divorce, religion, or other reasons, and SPIE will not require proof or supporting documentation for this change. When an author requests a name change on a work or works published in the SPIE Digital Library, the paper(s) will be updated and republished online, while maintaining the same citation information. Name changes do not require an erratum. It is recommended that co-authors are informed of the name change.
Misspellings and errors in an author's name are a different matter and still require correction via erratum.
To request a name change, please contact name_change_request@spie.org with your request. Include the paper DOI and the name change information. We will update the paper promptly and republish online, which will trigger it to be redelivered to all abstracting and indexing databases.
Misuse of this policy is an ethical violation and will be investigated and acted upon.
