Peer Review Policy

Journal follows a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality and integrity of the research published in the journal. The peer review policy is as follows:

  1. Initial Evaluation:

    • Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial office to assess their suitability for the journal.
    • Manuscripts that meet the journal's scope and formatting guidelines are assigned to relevant associate editors.
  2. Peer Review Process:

    • The associate editor identifies and selects qualified reviewers with expertise in the manuscript's subject area.
    • Reviewers evaluate the manuscript's scientific validity, originality, methodology, and significance.
    • The review process is double-blind, ensuring the anonymity of both the reviewers and authors.
    • Reviewers provide detailed feedback, comments, and suggestions to the authors to improve the manuscript.
    • Reviewers may recommend acceptance, revision, major revision, or rejection based on their assessment.
  3. Decision Making:

    • The associate editor evaluates the reviewers' comments and makes a decision on the manuscript.
    • The decision options include acceptance, acceptance with minor revisions, revision required, major revisions required, or rejection.
    • Authors receive the decision letter, along with reviewer comments, providing guidance for revisions if necessary.
  4. Revision and Resubmission:

    • If revisions are required, authors are requested to address all reviewer comments and make appropriate revisions.
    • Revised manuscripts undergo further evaluation by the associate editor to ensure that reviewer concerns are adequately addressed.
    • Authors are expected to provide a point-by-point response to the reviewer comments, indicating how each comment has been addressed.
  5. Final Decision and Acceptance:

    • The associate editor makes the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the revised manuscript.
    • Accepted manuscripts proceed to the production process for typesetting, formatting, and publication.
  6. Timelines:

    • Editorial team strives to ensure timely peer review, but the duration may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.
    • Authors are informed about the estimated time for receiving reviewer feedback and the overall review process.

The peer review process is designed to maintain the highest academic standards, promote constructive feedback, and ensure the credibility of published research. The collaborative efforts of authors, reviewers, and editors contribute to the advancement of computer science and system software knowledge.