matter
GitHub用于评估材料科学稿件是否符合Matter期刊的选题范围、叙事风格及严谨性要求，辅助作者进行投稿决策和重构故事框架。
Trigger Scenarios
选择Cell Press系列期刊
判断稿件是否具备广泛意义
了解拒稿标准
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill matter -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "matter",
"description": "Use when targeting Matter (Matter) or deciding whether a materials manuscript fits this Cell Press primary-research venue spanning atoms to systems with societal relevance. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, method-and-evidence bar, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics."
}
Matter (matter)
Journal positioning
Matter is a Cell Press primary-research journal covering materials science broadly defined — explicitly spanning "atoms to systems," from molecular and nanoscale materials through devices to integrated systems. As the materials sister title to Cell and Joule, it inherits the Cell Press model: selective, narrative-driven papers that report a transformative materials advance with clear conceptual significance and, frequently, societal relevance (sustainability, health, energy, manufacturing). Its defining character is that a paper must combine genuine novelty and rigor with a broad significance story legible to materials scientists across subfields; incremental property gains in a narrow system are a poor fit. Readership is the broad, interdisciplinary materials community. This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool. It does not replace the journal's current official guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live author instructions on the Matter Cell Press site.
When to trigger
- An author has a primary-research materials study with broad significance and is choosing a selective, narrative-driven Cell Press venue.
- A team is deciding between Matter and Joule, Advanced Materials, or Nature Materials and needs to understand Matter's atoms-to-systems scope and societal-relevance framing.
- A manuscript reports a transformative materials concept, platform, or system and needs Matter's significance-and-rigor bar clarified before submission.
- An author needs Matter's expectations on conceptual significance, data rigor, and Cell Press narrative house style, plus desk-reject criteria.
Scope & topic fit
- Materials chemistry and synthesis with a transformative design concept — nanomaterials, polymers, hybrids, framework materials — where the advance generalizes beyond one compound.
- Functional and energy materials: batteries, catalysts-as-materials, photovoltaics, electronic and optoelectronic materials, when the materials advance (not the device metric alone) is central.
- Soft, bio-, and living materials; sustainable and circular materials; materials for health, water, and the environment, with a clear societal-relevance story.
- Structural, mechanical, and manufacturing materials, including additive manufacturing and processing innovations that change what is possible.
- Computational and data-driven materials discovery, autonomous experimentation, and theory that delivers an experimentally consequential advance.
- Systems-level materials integration — from material to working device or platform — when the integration itself is the conceptual contribution.
Method & evidence bar
- The paper must pair rigorous, reproducible data with a clear significance story: what general principle or capability the advance unlocks, not just an incremental number.
- Materials claims require thorough characterization (composition, structure, and property) appropriate to the system, with controls and benchmarks against the state of the art.
- Performance metrics must be reported with proper normalization, error bars/replicates, and standardized parameters for the relevant domain (e.g., cycling/efficiency for energy, mechanical metrics for structural materials).
- Mechanistic or design-principle understanding is expected where it underpins the claim — established by experiment, characterization, or validated computation rather than assertion.
- Reproducibility and full methodological detail (synthesis, processing, measurement, computation) are required, with data deposited per Cell Press data-availability policy.
- Societal-relevance claims must be substantiated and proportionate, not aspirational hand-waving.
Structure & house style
- Cell Press narrative format: an eTOC blurb, a context-setting introduction, integrated Results and Discussion, and an Experimental Procedures/STAR-style Methods section; re-check the current Methods format on the live site.
- A "Progress and Potential" or equivalent significance statement is expected — a short, accessible articulation of why the work matters and to whom.
- A graphical abstract is required and must convey the materials advance and its significance at a glance.
- Figures should tell a coherent story integrating characterization, mechanism, and performance; each must advance the narrative rather than archive data.
- Writing is accessible and significance-forward, oriented to a broad materials readership; jargon is minimized and the advance is foregrounded early.
- Supplemental Information carries extended methods, additional characterization, and supporting data; article types and length limits should be re-checked on the live site.
Official-submission checklist
- Before giving submission-ready advice, read
../../resources/source-basis.mdand../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the official source anchors for this journal family, then cite the current Matter page you checked. - Search the live site for "Matter Cell Press guide for authors" and follow the current Cell Press version.
- Re-check article-type definitions and current length/figure limits, the significance-statement (Progress and Potential) requirement, and Supplemental Information conventions.
- Re-check Cell Press data-availability, code, and STAR Methods / Experimental Procedures requirements for the relevant materials domain.
- Re-check competing-interests, funding, lead-contact/author-contributions, and AI-use disclosure requirements; confirm preprint policy.
- If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.
Pre-submission self-check
- One sentence — the transformative materials advance and the broad significance (including societal relevance where applicable) it carries.
- Characterization, mechanism/design principle, and performance are rigorous, controlled, and benchmarked against the state of the art.
- Metrics are properly normalized and reported with error bars/replicates and domain-standard parameters.
- The significance statement and graphical abstract communicate why the work matters to a broad materials readership.
- Methods and data meet Cell Press reproducibility and data-availability requirements.
- The work is positioned against recent Matter / Nature Materials / Advanced Materials literature on the same materials problem.
Common desk-reject triggers
- An incremental property improvement in a narrow system with no general principle or broad significance story.
- A device- or application-only paper where the materials advance is thin and the metric is the sole contribution.
- Insufficient characterization, missing controls/benchmarks, or unsubstantiated performance and societal-relevance claims.
- A narrowly specialist study inaccessible to the broad readership, with no narrative significance framing.
- A review or perspective submitted as primary research, or a manuscript lacking the required significance statement and graphical abstract.
Re-routing decision
- Energy conversion/storage where energy science and device-level impact are the core:
joule. - Applied functional-materials advance centered on devices and performance:
advanced-materials. - Highest-impact, conceptually defining primary materials research:
nature-materials. - Authoritative materials review rather than primary research:
nature-reviews-materials.
Output format
[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] Matter
[Topic tags] <2–3 closest topics>
[Method/evidence] <does rigorous, benchmarked materials data pair with a clear atoms-to-systems significance story, societal relevance where applicable?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <article-type limits / significance statement & graphical abstract / STAR Methods & data availability / disclosure / preprint>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 13:02
