The journal implements double-blind peer review policy to ensure that only good science is published. Initially, the editor-in-chief ensures that each manuscript is original by making use of appropriate software. Then, all research articles in this journal undergo rigorous double-blind peer review procedure by anonymous reviewers.

The reviewers involve members of the journal editorial board, as well other researchers whose scope of interests coincides with the theme of work. Reviewers evaluate the article in terms of the originality of the results, the adequacy of the methods and findings, and decide whether the article can be accepted unchanged, or after some change or whether it is rejected.

Fair review. The editor ensures that each manuscript is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the author(s).

Confidentiality. The editor ensures that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.

Reporting standards. Authors should present an accurate account of their original research as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Manuscripts should satisfy the required format of the journal. All manuscripts should be professionally proofread before the submission.

Originality. Authors ensure that they have written an entirely original work.

Multiple or concurrent publications. Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. Authors are expected not to publish manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal.

Acknowledgement of sources. Manuscript reviewers ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any kind of similarity or overlap between the manuscripts under consideration or with any other published paper of which reviewer has personal knowledge are immediately brought to the editor’s notice.

Authorship of the paper. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made a significant contribution are listed as co-authors. All the co-authors ensure that they have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.

Authorship and AI tools. Authors should not list AI-assisted technologies, such as LLMs, chatbots, or image creators, as authors or co-authors. AI tools used in research or manuscript preparation must be transparently disclosed in the cover letter, acknowledgements, and methods section. Authors are responsible for accuracy, avoiding plagiarism, and guarding against AI-induced bias. Editors may reject manuscripts for inappropriate AI use, and reviewers should refrain from AI-generated reviews to maintain confidentiality. See also: COPE position statement about authorship and AI tools.

AI-generated images and other multimedia are not allowed in this journal without explicit permission from the editors. Exceptions may be considered for the content in manuscript directly related to AI or machine learning, subject to evaluation on an individual basis.

Fundamental errors in published works. If at any point of time, a significant error like factually inaccurate published information is discovered, this error or inaccuracy must be reported to the editor. The corrections of a significant error will be published by mutual agreement of the author and editor. Minor corrections, which do not significantly affect the content and understanding of the paper like spelling mistakes and grammatical errors, will not be published.

Standards of objectivity. In reviewing submitted manuscripts, reviewers express their views objectively, clearly, and with supporting arguments.

Promptness. In case a reviewer feels it is not possible for them to complete reviewing the manuscript within stipulated time, they are to inform the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.