Are there journals that may consider articles of the type "new proof of old results" but the paper is exceedingly short(1-3 pages)?

  • 5
    Could you add the field you are in (math, CS, other)? I assume the specific subfield would also be helpful. And then the question may be more suitable to the subject-specific SO site... May 12 '14 at 7:40
  • 4
    Being short compared to the existing proof is, if anything, an advantage and should increase the number of journals that would accept your paper (assuming, of course, that the shortness comes from simplicity rather than abbreviation.) May 12 '14 at 17:17
  • 2
    This prior post of the OP shows that he is working in pure mathematics: academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16075/…. May 12 '14 at 17:42

The answer is certainly "yes", but to identify the best fit for your paper you'll have to decide how different your proof is from previous proofs. It often happens that two proofs look completely different when viewed line-by-line, but still the main intermediate steps in the proofs are essentially the same -- in other words, proofs can use the same strategy but different tactics. If your main contribution is in finding an efficient or elegant way to present some of the same ideas that were used in previous proofs, then you might consider Expositiones Mathematicae or the American Mathematical Monthly. On the other hand, if your proofs use entirely new ideas, then you have done original research and you should submit your paper to a standard journal. In between these two extremes is L'Enseignement Mathématique, which often publishes papers which combine new research with improved exposition of known results.


Most of the time, I would go to any journal that fits the subject (i.e., with an editor that should be interested, and know who to sent the paper to). For example I have had recent success with a 2 to 4 pages (depending on formatting) paper in Israel Journal of Math, which is not especially inclined toward short papers.

  • The only journals I know which are truly not inclined toward short papers are the designated companion journals to other journals which impose a hard upper limit on page length. Otherwise everyone likes short papers: why not? May 12 '14 at 20:23
  • @PeteL.Clark- maybe my English is the issue here: I did not meant that IJM was biased against short papers, only that it was not biased in their favor. The point being precisely that for short papers (as opposed to long papers, which pose different problems), one does not need to target a journal specialized in short papers. May 13 '14 at 7:24

Depends on the field and the nature of your derivation. If it gives new insights and uses completely new techniques that might in themselves be of interest, then you might pursue a regular journal. If the derivation is a clever application of an established concept, then you might consider something like the American Journal of Physics, or others with a similar, pedagogic, agenda.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.