2012 Special NSREC Issue of the IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science Comments by the Editors

Abstract

The December 2012 special issue of the IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science contains selected papers from the 49th annual IEEE International Nuclear and Space Radiation Effects Conference (NSREC) held July 16���20, 2012, in Miami, Florida USA. 95 papers presented at the 2012 NSREC were submitted for consideration for this year���s special issue. Those papers that appear in this special issue were able to successfully complete the review process before the deadline for the December issue. A few additional papers may appear in subsequent issues of the TRANSACTIONS. This publication is the premier archival journal for research on space and nuclear radiation effects in materials, devices, circuits, and systems. This distinction is the direct result of the conscientious efforts of both the authors, who present and document their work, and the reviewers, who selflessly volunteer their time and talent to help review the manuscripts. Each paper in this journal has been reviewed by experts selected by the editors for their expertise and knowledge of the particular subject areas. The peer review process for a typical technical journal generally takes six months to one year to complete. To publish this special issue of the IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science (in December), the review process, from initial submission to final form, must be completed in about 10 weeks. Because of the short schedule, both the authors and reviewers are required to respond very quickly. The reviewers listed on the following pages contributed vitally to this quick-turn review process.We would like to express our sincere appreciation to each of them for accepting this difficult, but critical role in the process. To provide consistent reviews of papers throughout the year, the IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science relies on a year-round editorial board that manages reviews for submissions throughout the year to the TRANSACTIONS in the area of radiation effects. The review process is managed by a Senior Editor and six Associate Editors who are technically knowledgeable in one or more specializations and are experienced in the publication process. This editorial process works very well. With twice the number of editors as previously used for overseeing the review process, each editor is able to devote more time to individual papers.