Of these, the main factors taken into account are
significance and originality.
The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with
revisions but without re-review, revise and resubmit, or rejection. Articles
that are often rejected include those that are poorly written or organized or
are written in poor English. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a
submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed. Articles may be rejected without
review if the Editor-in-Chief considers the article obviously not suitable for
publication.
The submission process is handled
electronically. Manuscripts are to be submitted to the following address: submission(?)ijcla.bahripublications.com or directly to the Editor-in-Chief, see the contact options at www.Gelbukh.com. Only full papers are
reviewed; abstracts are not considered for review. Full papers are expected to
be at least 10 pages long, and would normally not be longer than 30 pages. The
recommended format is that of Springer LNCS; however, any format is acceptable
for the review version.
The journal is published two times a year,
in March and in September, with an option of a combined yearly issue published
in December when the editors esteem it appropriate.
Publication has no cost to the authors.
The authors are permitted and encouraged to
post published articles on their personal or institutional website after one
year from the date of publication.
The journal provides open access to all
published papers after one year from publication; however, the most recent
issue is only available to subscribers.
The Editor-in-Chief of the journal is
responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should
be published. The editor may be guided by the editorial policies of the journal
and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding
libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with the
members of the Editorial Board or reviewers in making this decision.
The Editor-in-Chief and the reviewers evaluate
manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender,
sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political
philosophy of the authors.
The Editor-in-Chief, the members of the
Editorial Board, and any editorial staff must not disclose any information
about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors of the manuscript,
reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as
appropriate.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a
submitted manuscript will not be used in the own research of the Editor-in-Chief
or the members of the Editorial Board without the express written consent of
the author.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board in
making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the
author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness: A
selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a
manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the
editor and decline to review the paper.
Confidentiality: The manuscripts received for review will be treated as confidential
documents. They will not be shown to or discussed with others except as
authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the
author is unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with
supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should attempt to identify relevant published work that
has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that a result or argument has
been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A
reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity
or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published
paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be
kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not
consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from
competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of
the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate
account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its
significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A
paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to
replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute
unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention: Authors are encouraged to provide the raw data in connection with a
paper for both editorial review and public access (consistent with the
ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) if possible, and should in any event
be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original
works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this
has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent
Publication: An author should not in general publish
manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal
or conference. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal or conference
constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the
nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant
contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the
reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be
listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain
substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or
listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all
appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper,
and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper
and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or
other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the
results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support
for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or
her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the
journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct
the paper. |
