Why is the quality of publications expected to be high not only for GMD but also for GMDD, even though the access peer-review is not as extensive as a traditional full peer-review?
• First of all, manuscripts with a clear lack of substantial results or with excessive formal deficiencies will be sorted out rigorously in the access peer-review in the same way as in the peer-review of conventional journals. • Even if a low quality paper passed the access peer-review and was published in GMDD, its deficiencies would most probably be revealed in the Interactive Public Discussion by the referees and other interested scientists. The opportunity for Interactive Public Discussion of papers allows efficient cross control of publication quality within the scientific community and is expected to deter deficient submissions. • The access peer-review is meant to assure the basic scientific and technical quality of the papers published in GMDD, but the opportunity for an efficient public discussion by all interested members of the scientific community immediately following publication is expected to enhance the actual quality control beyond the limits of the traditional peer-re
