Authorship Policy#

Version 1.0 | Effective Date: January 1, 2026#

Why This Matters#

Getting authorship credit is important for your career! This policy ensures everyone gets fair credit for their work.

Types of Papers#

Technical/Instrument Papers#

Author list: Everyone who contributed to that specific thing, alphabetically by last name

Acknowledgment: “for the CAPIBARA Collaboration” after the names

Good for: Hardware papers, software papers, methods papers

Science Results Papers#

Author list: “The CAPIBARA Collaboration”

In the paper: List everyone alphabetically (usually in an appendix or footnote)

Writing team: 3-5 people who actually write it (listed first)

Good for: Major discoveries, survey results, flagship papers

Student Thesis Papers#

Your thesis work: You’re first author!

Co-authors: Your supervisor, people who helped significantly

Acknowledgment: Credit CAPIBARA for data/support

Who Gets To Be an Author?#

You should be an author if you made a substantial contribution to:

Science/Technical Stuff:

  • Designed or built the hardware

  • Wrote significant code or analysis tools

  • Collected or processed data

  • Did the actual analysis

  • Came up with key ideas

The Paper Itself:

  • Wrote sections of the paper

  • Made key figures/tables

  • Critical review that improved it significantly

AND you must:

  • Read and approve the final version

  • Respond to authorship invitation within 2 weeks

  • Be accountable for your part

What DOESN’T Count as Authorship Alone#

  • Just general supervision

  • Providing standard resources (computer access, etc.)

  • Minor comments or feedback

  • Routine data collection without analysis

  • Being there when it happened

  • Getting funding (goes in acknowledgments)

How We Decide Authorship#

For Small Papers (Most of Ours)#

  1. Lead author proposes list: “I think these people should be authors”

  2. Circulate to proposed authors: “Are you in? Anyone we’re missing?”

  3. Finalize list: Within a week or two

  4. Write the paper: Lead author + team

  5. Everyone reviews: All authors read and comment

  6. Everyone approves: All authors say “yes, submit it”

  7. Submit!

Timeline: ~2-3 months total (varies a lot)

For Big Collaboration Papers#

  1. Programme Lead proposes: “Let’s write about X”

  2. Form writing team: Call for volunteers, select 3-5 people

  3. Make author list: Who’s been active and contributed?

  4. Opt-in period: Members opt in (2-3 weeks)

  5. Write draft: Writing team writes it (~1-2 months)

  6. Collaboration review: Everyone reads and comments (~3 weeks)

  7. Address comments: Writing team revises

  8. Final approval: Must get >50% to approve

  9. Submit!

Timeline: ~4-6 months

Author Order#

Alphabetical (Default)#

Most of our papers list authors alphabetically by last name. Simple and fair.

Contribution-Based (Optional)#

If everyone agrees, we can order by contribution:

  • First author: Did the most work

  • Last author: Senior person/supervisor (common in some fields)

  • Middle: Others by contribution

We decide this together before writing.

For Collaboration Papers#

  • “The CAPIBARA Collaboration” as author

  • Individual names listed alphabetically in appendix

Student Thesis Work#

Using CAPIBARA Data for Your Thesis#

You’re allowed! Just:

  1. Ask first: Email Programme Lead describing what you want to do

  2. Get approval: Usually quick and easy

  3. Do your work: Analyze, write thesis

  4. Acknowledge us: Mention CAPIBARA in acknowledgments

  5. Share draft: Let Programme Lead read it before defense

Your rights:

  • You can publish first (we won’t scoop you)

  • You’re first author on thesis papers

  • CAPIBARA can also publish using the same data (with credit to you)

Example Acknowledgment:#

“This work was conducted as part of the CAPIBARA Collaboration. Data was provided by CAPIBARA-COSMOS/CRD. I thank the collaboration members for their support, particularly [names].”

The Writing Process#

Drafting#

  • Lead author or writing team writes first draft

  • Share early drafts with team for feedback

  • Iterate until it’s solid

Review#

  • Circulate to all proposed authors

  • Give 2-3 weeks for comments

  • Address comments or explain why not

  • Multiple rounds if needed

Approval#

  • Final version sent to all authors

  • Need explicit “yes” from everyone

  • Non-responders: send reminder, then may remove from author list

  • Must approve within 2 weeks usually

Disputes (Hopefully Rare!)#

If There’s a Disagreement About Authorship:#

  1. Talk it out: Try to resolve directly

  2. Programme Lead mediates: Looks at evidence, proposes solution

  3. Advisory Board: If still stuck, advisors help decide

  4. Decision is final: Made by Programme Lead with advisor input

Prevention is better: Discuss authorship early and often!

External Collaborators#

Non-members can be authors if:

  • They contributed substantially

  • Programme Lead approved the collaboration

  • They follow our policies

Adding/Removing Authors After Submission#

Before Acceptance#

  • Need really good reason

  • All current authors must agree

  • Must notify journal editor

After Acceptance#

  • Very hard - journals don’t like this

  • Only for serious ethical reasons

  • Requires journal and everyone’s approval

Bottom line: Get the author list right BEFORE submitting!

Acknowledgments Section#

People who helped but aren’t authors go here:

  • Technical assistance

  • Feedback and suggestions

  • Facility staff

  • Funding agencies (always acknowledge funding!)

Template:

“We thank [names] for [what they did]. This work was supported by [funding]. We acknowledge use of [facilities/resources].”

Conference Presentations#

Talks/Posters#

  • Include key contributors as authors

  • Acknowledge “CAPIBARA Collaboration”

  • Share slides afterward

Proceedings Papers#

  • Follow same rules as regular papers (usually fewer authors for posters)

Common Scenarios#

“I built the detector, but someone else used it”#

  • You: Author on the hardware paper (probably lead)

  • Them: Author on the science paper using it

  • You on their paper: Author if you helped with the analysis; acknowledged if you just built it

“I wrote software, others use it”#

  • You: Author (probably lead) on software paper

  • Users: Cite your software paper

  • Users’ papers: You’re author if the software was crucial and novel; otherwise cited

“Someone left mid-project”#

  • If they contributed significantly before leaving: still an author

  • Must still review and approve

  • If can’t be reached after trying: may remove (document attempts)

Data and Code Sharing#

When you publish, you should:

  • Archive raw data properly

  • Make analysis code available (GitHub!)

  • Include data availability statement

  • Follow journal/funding agency requirements

Helps reproducibility and open science!

Publication Tracking#

We keep track of all CAPIBARA papers:

  • List on website

  • Celebrate publications!

  • Use for progress reports

  • Helps everyone’s CVs

Policy Violations#

If someone:

  • Excludes qualified authors

  • Includes unqualified authors

  • Bypasses review process

  • Submits without approval

This violates Code of Conduct and may result in:

  • Correction of author list

  • Retraction if serious

  • Membership review

Quick Checklist#

Before starting a paper:

  • Figure out what type of paper

  • Propose author list

  • Get Programme Lead OK

  • Set clear contribution expectations

While writing:

  • Keep everyone updated

  • Share drafts

  • Document contributions

Before submitting:

  • All authors reviewed it

  • All authors approved it

  • Author list is final and correct

  • Acknowledgments complete

  • Data/code sharing arranged

Last Updated: January 1, 2026

Questions? Ask in GitHub Discussions or email the Programme Lead.