Published Q1 Journal vs. Under Review at Top-Tier Journal for Top Robotics PhD Admissions
Hi everyone,
I'm applying to Robotics / Autonomous Systems PhD programs for Fall 2027 (deadlines around Dec 1, 2026). I am currently deciding between two publication venues with my advisor, and I'd love an honest take from anyone who has served on an admissions committee or evaluated applicants at top-tier programs.
The Context:
My Role:2nd author (co-working closely with a phd who is 1st author).
The Paper: Focuses on autonomous vehicle motion planning, and optimization. It features both theoretical/algorithmic contributions and real-world hardware validation.
Our Two Options
Option A (Top-Tier IEEE Journal): flagship Transactions level. Highly prestigious, but slower review process. Given our timeline, it will almost certainly be "Submitted" or "Under Review" by my Dec 1 or 15th application deadline.
Option B (Solid Q1 IEEE Journal): Good metrics, legitimate Q1, but less overall prestige than Option A. However, it features a fast turnaround, meaning it will very likely be completely "Accepted/Published" before my application deadlines.
My Question:
From a top-tier robotics PhD admissions perspective, which carries more weight on a CV: a finalized, peer-reviewed Accepted/Published paper in a respectable Q1 journal, or a "Submitted/Under Review" status at a flagship Transactions venue?
How heavily do top committees discount "under review" lines for second authors? Does the fact that the work includes real hardware experiments change how they view a "submitted" paper if they can look at an arXiv preprint?
Thanks for any insights