--- name: brycewang-stanford/earth-and-planetary-science-letters source: https://app.decimal.ai/s/brycewang-stanford-earth-and-planetary-science-letters@1/SKILL.md source_sha256: 370a6fd62825 --- # Earth and Planetary Science Letters (earth-and-planetary-science-letters) ## Journal positioning Earth and Planetary Science Letters (EPSL), published by Elsevier, is a broad-interest journal for **quantitative research on the physical and chemical processes of the Earth and other planets**. The defining expectation is a process-oriented, quantitatively rigorous advance — in geochemistry, geophysics, geodynamics, petrology and mineral physics, planetary processes, or paleoclimate/paleoceanography proxy science — that is significant to a wide earth- and planetary-science readership rather than to one specialty alone. Despite the "Letters" name, EPSL favors complete, self-contained articles in which the data, modeling, and interpretation jointly support a generalizable mechanism; a purely descriptive regional report, a method note with no process payoff, or a result of interest only to a narrow sub-field is a weak fit. This skill is a **fit / venue-selection / re-framing** tool. It does not replace the journal's current author guidance. Before submitting, re-check the live EPSL / Elsevier author instructions and data policy. ## When to trigger - The author names EPSL and wants a fit/framing check for a quantitative solid-earth or planetary-science paper. - A regional geochemical or geophysical study must be re-framed into a transferable process or mechanism of broad interest. - The author is choosing between EPSL (longer quantitative process article) and `geology` (short, high-immediacy GSA letter). - The author needs EPSL's broad-interest significance bar and quantitative evidence expectations. ## Scope & topic fit - Geochemistry and isotope geochemistry: tracers, dating, and elemental/isotopic systems constraining earth and planetary processes. - Geophysics and geodynamics: seismology, mantle dynamics, tectonics, gravity/magnetics, and lithosphere/deep-earth structure and evolution. - Petrology, mineral physics, and high-pressure/high-temperature experiments bearing on planetary interiors and differentiation. - Surface and planetary processes: volcanism, impacts, planetary evolution, and comparative planetology with quantitative constraints. - Paleoclimate and paleoceanography proxy records and their calibration, when the contribution is a mechanism or a generalizable proxy advance. - Cross-cutting modeling that links observations to a quantitative earth/planetary process. ## Method & evidence bar - The contribution must be a **quantitative, generalizable process or mechanism**, not a catalogue of measurements from one locality. - Geochemical/isotopic data require documented analytical methods, standards, reference materials, blanks, and full uncertainty propagation. - Geophysical and modeling results need stated assumptions, resolution/sensitivity tests, and evaluation against independent observations. - Proxy and paleo reconstructions require explicit calibration, age-model treatment, and uncertainty, with alternative interpretations considered. - Claims of broad significance must connect the local result to a wider earth/planetary process; mechanism should be argued, not merely correlated. - Underlying data (and code where used) should be deposited in a FAIR repository or supplied as machine-readable tables per Elsevier/research-data policy. ## Structure & house style - Elsevier article format; EPSL is article-length and self-contained despite the "Letters" name — re-check current article types and length on the live guide. - The introduction must state the earth/planetary-science gap and the broad-interest contribution, not merely describe a field area or sample set. - Figures should be quantitative and load-bearing (data with uncertainty, model–data comparisons, maps/cross-sections, isotope/phase diagrams) and support the mechanism. - Methods and a data-availability statement must let a reader reproduce the central result; analytical protocols and data tables belong in the paper or supplement. - Interpretation should be proportionate to the data and explicitly bounded by stated uncertainties. ## Official-submission checklist - Before giving submission-ready advice, read `../../resources/source-basis.md` and `../../resources/official-source-map.md`; start from the Elsevier/EPSL anchors, then cite the current EPSL page you checked. - Search the live site for "Earth and Planetary Science Letters guide for authors" and follow the current Elsevier version. - Re-check article types, abstract/format expectations, and length/figure expectations. - Confirm the **research-data policy**: deposit data/code in a FAIR repository or provide machine-readable data tables, and cite them appropriately. - Re-check competing-interests, funding, author-contribution, CRediT, AI-use disclosure, and open-access terms. - If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win. ## Pre-submission self-check - [ ] The contribution is a quantitative, generalizable process/mechanism, not a local catalogue. - [ ] Analytical methods, standards, and full uncertainty propagation are documented. - [ ] Geophysical/model results include resolution/sensitivity tests and independent evaluation. - [ ] Proxy/paleo reconstructions state calibration, age models, and alternative interpretations. - [ ] Broad-interest significance is argued by linking the local result to a wider process. - [ ] Data (and code) are deposited or supplied machine-readable per the data policy. ## Common desk-reject triggers - A descriptive regional report with no transferable process or broad-interest significance. - Geochemical data without standards, reference materials, or uncertainty propagation. - Model or geophysical results lacking sensitivity tests or independent evaluation. - Proxy/paleo claims without calibration, age-model treatment, or uncertainty. - Interpretation that outruns the data or ignores plausible alternatives. - Scope too narrow or too applied for EPSL's broad earth/planetary readership. ## Re-routing decision - Short, high-immediacy result with broad significance in tight length → `geology`. - Highest-impact earth-science breakthrough for a general audience → `nature-geoscience`. - Carbon/nutrient/element cycling and budgets are the core → `global-biogeochemical-cycles`. - A documented dataset is the deliverable rather than the interpretation → `earth-system-science-data`. - Short, fast geophysical/geochemical communication → `geophysical-research-letters`. ## Output format ```text [Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason) [Target] Earth and Planetary Science Letters [Topic tags] <2–3 closest solid-earth/planetary topics> [Process contribution] [Method/evidence] [Top risk] [Official items to re-check]
[Re-route suggestion] ```