Editorial standards

Automatica publishes news, analysis and commentary on technology and its consequences. Our editorial standards cover sourcing, evidence, review and corrections.

Evidence and uncertainty

Our automated publication checks require supporting document passages for material factual claims, including headlines and summaries. We distinguish reported claims from established facts, preprints from peer-reviewed research, and opinion from reporting. Multiple links do not necessarily represent independent sources.

Research, policy, security and product coverage must explain relevant methods, dates, versions and limitations. Missing evidence should be acknowledged. Consequential medical, legal and financial claims and disputed allegations are held for human editorial review.

Corrections

Use the article report control to flag an error. Editors review reports against the cited evidence. Changes to previously published reporting require a dated public explanation; revision history preserves earlier text. Older articles may predate these controls.

Coverage

Our remit includes research, developer tools, applications, business and work, robotics, infrastructure, policy and safety. We monitor coverage and source freshness; we do not claim exhaustive coverage of every development.

Opinion and independence

Opinion articles are labeled and represent the perspective of their bylined writer, not a site-wide editorial position. Factual premises in opinion remain subject to sourcing requirements. Coverage is not sold to the subjects it covers, and material sponsorship or conflicts must be disclosed.

Contact

Readers can use the report control on an article or visit our contact page to raise an editorial concern.