Author Guidelines

GENERAL INFORMATION 

Starting in November 2017, all articles submitted to Reaktor should be written in good English. This journal encompasses research articles, review articles, or state-of-the-art studies, as well as analysis and problem-solving in industries relevant to the chemical engineering field. The work should not have been published or submitted for publication elsewhere. Articles are written and organized in the following order: Title; author name; author affiliation; Abstract; Keywords; Introduction; Materials and Methods; Results and Discussion; Conclusions; Acknowledgments (If any); Notation List (if any); and References. 

Title

The title is an opportunity to attract the reader’s attention. Remember that readers are the potential authors who will cite your article. Identify the main issue of the paper. Begin with the subject of the paper. The title should be accurate, unambiguous, specific, and complete. Do not contain infrequently used abbreviations.

Abstract and Keywords

An abstract should inform the prospective reader of what you did and highlight the key findings. Avoid using technical jargon and uncommon abbreviations. The abstract should be clear, concise, and descriptive. This abstract should briefly introduce the problem (preferably 1-2 sentences), the paper's objective, the research method in short, and a brief summary of the results. The abstract should end with a comment on the significance of the results or a brief conclusion. Please follow word limitations (100‐300 words). 

Keywords are the labels of your manuscript and are critical to correct indexing and searching. Therefore, the keywords should represent the content and highlight of your article. Use only those abbreviations that are firmly established in the field. e.g. DNA. 

Introduction

Authors should provide an adequate background and a very short literature survey to record the existing solutions/method, to show which is the best of previous research, to show the main limitation of the previous research, to show what you hope to achieve (to solve the limitation) and to show the scientific merit or novelties of the paper. Avoid a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results. Do not describe the literature survey as author by author; it should be presented as a group per method or topic reviewed, which refers to some literature. At the end of the introduction section, the objectives of the work should be stated. An example of a novelty statement or a gap analysis statement at the end of the Introduction section (after the state of the art of the previous research survey) is “........ (short summary of background)....... A few researchers focused on ....... There have been limited studies concerned with........ Therefore, this research intends to ................. The objectives of this research are .........”. 

Materials and Methods

Materials and methods should give reproducible experiments to the readers. Provide sufficient detail to allow the work to be reproduced. A reference should indicate published methods; only relevant modifications should be described. Do not repeat the details of established methods. For the chemicals, please provide details of brand and purity (example: CaO (Merck, 99.5%)). 

Results and Discussions

Results should be clear and concise. The results should summarize (scientific) findings rather than provide data in great detail. Please highlight differences between your results or findings and the previous publications by other researchers.

The discussion should explore the significance of the results of the work, not repeat them. A combined Results and Discussion section is often appropriate. Avoid extensive citations and discussion of published literature.

In discussion, it is the most important section of your article. Here, you get the chance to sell your data. Make the discussion corresponding to the results, but do not reiterate the results. Often, it should begin with a summary of the main scientific findings (not experimental results). The following components should be covered in the discussion: How do your results relate to the original question or objectives outlined in the Introduction section (what)? Do you provide an interpretation scientifically for each of your results or findings presented (why)? Are your results consistent with what other investigators have reported (what else)? Or are there any differences? 

Conclusions

Conclusions should only answer the objectives of the research. Tells how your work advances the field from the present state of knowledge. Without clear Conclusions, reviewers and readers will find it difficult to judge the work and whether or not it merits publication in the journal. Do not repeat the Abstract or list experimental results. Provide a clear scientific justification for your work, and indicate possible applications and extensions. You should also suggest future experiments and/or highlight those underway.

Acknowledgments

Recognize those who helped in the research, especially funding supporters of your research. Include individuals who have assisted you in your study: Advisors, Financial supporters, or many other supporters, i.e., Proofreaders, Typists, and Suppliers who may have given materials. 

References

Cite the main scientific publications on which your work is based. Cite only items that you have read. Do not inflate the manuscript with too many references. Avoid excessive self‐citations. Avoid excessive citations of publications from the same region. Check each reference against the original source (author's name, volume, issue, year). All publications cited in the text should be included as a list of references.

Article guidelines can be downloaded from this link. 

MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION 

Authors can prepare the articles according to Reaktor template.