Last year, the editors of the section solicited papers from researchers in the field of LENR.
These papers went through two reviews, first by the special section editors and then, if the editors decided to forward the paper, by a normal peer reviewer assigned by Current Science.
The anonymous reviewer of my paper was familiar with physics and not with cold fusion, and was skeptical at first.Yes, I modified my paper extensively in response to his critique and it is, no doubt, better for it. Apparently, he was convinced, he gave a glowing recommendation for publication.
There are some very good papers in this collection, and others that are brief reports on activity in various nations or organizations.
I specially recommend McKubre's paper,"Cold fusion: comments on the state of scientific proof".
But there are *many* excellent papers.
One might notice that we are not being shy about using the term "cold fusion." Times change.
It's fusion, get over it.
("Fusion" is a result, not a mechanism. The mechanism is a mystery.)