Referees must be registered to JINST. Registration gives access to your personal pages for all the roles you play in the journal (author, coauthor, referee, editor). There you can perform all the actions connected with the stages in the editorial procedure. Registration is easy and free of charge. To register you have to fill in the form of the home page of JINST with the following data:

• Login name
• Password
• First Name
• Last Name
• E-mail

Click here to register.

If you do not remember your registration data, please do not register again, rather click on "automatic password recovery" on the JINST home page. You can update your profile and change login name and password by clicking on "modify my personal data".

The checkbox "Remember my login name on this computer" allows a "cookie" to be sent to your computer, which saves you from logging in every time, unless you click on the "logout" button.

Sometimes, when an editor wants to appoint as referee someone who is not a registered user, she/he can register the new user. If you have been registered in this way, you will receive an e-mail with temporary login and password. After logging in you will be able to modify your personal data.

Communication tools are available in each page to communicate with the Journal Editorial Office. Please ALWAYS use these tools instead of normal e-mail. These messages will be saved in the database and associated to the document they refer to.

For every submitted preprint the editor in charge of the editorial procedure can turn to one or more referees for an opinion.

Referees should accept/decline the assignment within 3 days of the editor's request.

The pending preprints in the referee pages are divided into sections displayed like an index:

• New submissions: newly submitted preprints that an editor has asked you to review.
• Revised preprints: submissions that have been reviewed, for which the editor requested a revision. The editor-in-charge would like to know your opinion on the resubmitted version.
• Preprints revised after a minor revision: preprints that have been reviewed, for which the editor requested a minor revision. The editor-in-charge would like to know your opinion on the resubmitted version.
• Appeals against rejection: preprints rejected by the editor, for which the author has sent an appeal. The editor has decided to reconsider the preprint which is now assigned to you for a review.
• Preprints to be checked and reviewed again: preprints previously accepted for publication for which the author has requested changes in the proofreading stage that require the editor's approval. The editor has requested that the authors resubmit a revised version, which is now assigned to you for a review. The previous version of the preprint is available for comparison under the link "all versions".

When a preprint is assigned to you as a referee, you are kindly requested to accept or decline the assignment by using the appropriate bottons at the bottom of your referee pages for the preprint in question (i.e. JINST_001P_0106). This is to make sure you have read the editor's review request and to inform her/him whether you will be able to review the submission in the requested time frame.

The report must be prepared in a separate file (TeX/LaTeX or txt), according to the guidelines in how to write a report and should be pasted in the appropriate form. Reports written in MS Word can be pasted into the form provided that no mathematical symbols have been used. Please remember not to sign the report: the editor-in-charge will learn your identity from the system. A standard, editable message addressed to the editor is also available on your referee pages after you click the "send report" button. After editing your message to the editor-in-charge and/or pasting your report please send it clicking on "send report" again.

Furthermore, in the top part of the page there are two navigation bars. The top one provides access to the tool for modifying your personal data and to this HELP. The bottom one leads to all archived contributions, under the tag "my reviews".

• My reviews are all the articles which you have been asked to review. You can access all the versions of the preprint up to the one that you have been referee for. As far as published articles are concerned, you cannot see the final version, which is accessible on the IOP site to authorized users.

For each version you are enabled to see all the reports written by you and any other associated document that the editor-in-charge has enabled you to access (referee reports by other referees, cover letters, editor reports...).

To be considered for publication in JINST, contributions must contain significant new material, must be of high quality and scientific interest, must be written in good, scientific English and must be on subject matter covered by the Journal.

Please bear in mind that one of the aims of JINST is to vet the large number of preprints and select those preprints that truly satisfy the above requirements.

Technical reports are reports on innovative technical achievements related to topics covered by JINST. Technical reports are submitted as such according to the list of keywords. The accent is not necessarily on novelty or on scientific value but rather on relevance to the community. Regular articles may be degraded into technical reports by referees/editors. In such cases, the Editor will inform the author that his/her article is not suited for publication as a regular paper (providing the reasons) and if adequate, will offer him/her to publish it as a technical report.

The report should indicate quite clearly whether - in your opinion - the contribution:

• Can be published as it stands
• Can be published with minor changes (a minor revision)
• Can be published after the authors have made the revisions mentioned in the report
• Cannot be published.

On the grounds of the referee report the editor will take the final decision and write the report to be sent to the authors. In case of revision, referees may be asked to review the revised version. The procedure is the same as in the first round of reviewing. Further rounds of revision can be asked by the editor before his/her final decision.

If you are requested to review a preprint that has already been reviewed (for instance a revised version) it is useful to look at the section "all versions" (in the gray navigation bar towards the top of the page), to evaluate the previous history of the preprint. You will be able to see all previous versions of the preprint. For these versions, the editor-in-charge can decide which of the referee reports, cover letters and editor reports you should have access to.

The cover letter will indicate the changes made by the author and/or account for those that have not been made.