Editorial Board

Journal Information

Contents

Editorial Policies

This journal endorses and follows the standards and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) other internationally recognized best practices in scholarly publishing to ensure the integrity, transparency, and rigor of the review and publication process.
The editorial policies are reviewed and updated periodically to remain aligned with global standards in engineering research publishing and evolving ethical guidelines.

Open Access

This journal follows a fully open access publishing model. All published articles are made freely and permanently available online without subscription or access charges. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, and link to the full text of articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without prior permission from the publisher or the authors, in accordance with the principles of open knowledge dissemination.

Authors retain the copyright and full publishing rights form link for their work. By submitting to this journal, authors agree to make their original work freely available for use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that proper credit is given to the authors and the original source.

A copyright statement will appear on all published articles in HTML, PDF, and XML formats. Authors grant the journal the right of first publication by signing a License to Publish agreement prior to formal publication.
Authors must confirm that their manuscript is original, has not been published previously, and is not under consideration by any other journal at the time of submission.

If copyrighted materials (such as figures, tables, or images) from other sources are included in the manuscript, authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary permissions and providing appropriate acknowledgments.

CC BY License

All articles in this journal are published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License 

This license ensures open access and promotes wide academic exchange.

Under this license, users are free to:

Share – copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.

Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use.

Conditions of use:

Attribution – proper credit must be given to the original authors and source, a link to the license must be provided, and any changes made must be indicated.

No additional restrictions – users may not impose legal or technological barriers that restrict others from exercising the rights granted under this license.

Editorial Freedom

The journal upholds the principle of editorial independence. The Editor-in-Chief and editorial board members have full authority over the editorial content and the timing of publication.

All editorial decisions, including article review, selection, revision, and acceptance, are made independently based on the quality, originality, and relevance of the work to the field of engineering.

The publisher does not interfere in editorial decisions, nor do commercial considerations influence the outcome of the peer review and publication process. This ensures fairness, transparency, and integrity in scholarly publishing.

Key Editorial Policies & Reference Links

Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Model

anonymous to authors, while authors’ identities are visible to reviewers. All submitted manuscripts (except invited Editorials) undergo a rigorous review to assess their originality, technical validity, significance, and clarity of presentation.

Peer Review Process

Initial Check form download option link – The Managing Editor screens each submission for plagiarism, compliance with the journal’s scope, and formatting requirements. Manuscripts that pass are assigned to an Academic Editor.

Editorial Evaluation – The Academic Editor (Editor-in-Chief or a designated Editorial Board member/Guest Editor) decides whether the manuscript proceeds to full peer review. Submissions that are clearly unsuitable or of insufficient quality may be declined at this stage.

External Peer Review – Suitable manuscripts are reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field of engineering. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript on:

  • Novelty and significance of contribution
  • Technical soundness and methodology
  • Relevance to engineering practice and research
  • Organization and clarity of presentation

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive feedback and an overall recommendation (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject) within 14 days of accepting the review invitation.

Decision – The Academic Editor considers reviewers’ reports and makes the final decision. Additional reviews may be sought if reports are conflicting or insufficient.Editorial Board and Guest Editor Submissions

Manuscripts submitted by Editorial Board members or Guest Editors are handled independently by other qualified editors to ensure transparency and fairness.

Special Issue Manuscripts

Special issue papers are subject to the same rigorous review process as regular submissions. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for oversight of the content and for supervising Guest Editors to maintain consistent quality standards.Guest Editor Guidelines and Editorial Process.

Peer Reviewers

Selection of Reviewers

Appropriate reviewers are selected according to the following criteria:

They are independent from the authors and their institutions.

They have expertise in the same or closely related research area as the manuscript.

They have recent publications in the field and can provide an informed evaluation.

They are able to deliver a review within the required timeframe.

Author-Suggested Reviewers

Authors may recommend potential reviewers with suitable expertise. The journal, however, reserves the right to decide whether or not to invite them. Suggested reviewers should:

Have a recent publication record in the relevant research area.

Not have co-authored or submitted a paper with any author in the recent past.

Not share a current or recent institutional affiliation with any author.

Not be a current or recent collaborator of any author.

Not have a close personal relationship with any author.

Not have any financial conflict of interest with the work.

Authors should provide the reviewer’s name, email address, institution, research area, and ORCID (if available) when making suggestions.

Not for Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

Declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review.

Respect the confidentiality of the peer review process.

Dispose of manuscript copies after completing the review.

Provide objective and constructive feedback, without bias based on nationality, gender, religion, political views, or other personal factors.

Report any suspected misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication).

Avoid requesting unnecessary citations to their own work.

Submit reports in a timely manner or request an extension when necessary.

Roles of Participants in Peer Review

Managing Editor – Screens submissions for scope, formatting, and plagiarism; identifies suitable reviewers; and manages communication between authors, reviewers, and editors iThenticate),. https://www.ithenticate.com/

Academic Editor – Oversees the peer review process, evaluates reports, and makes the final decision (accept, revise, or reject). This role is usually held by the Editor-in-Chief, but may be delegated to an Editorial Board member, Guest Editor, or subject expert. The Academic Editor’s name will be published alongside the article upon acceptance.Peer Review Guidelines.

Authorship

Authorship Criteria

The journal follows the principles of authorship recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) https://publicationethics.org/ and other internationally recognized best practices. To qualify as an author, individuals must meet all of the following conditions:

Made substantial contributions to the conception, design, development, or analysis of the research work; AND

Participated in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for intellectual content; AND

Approved the final version of the manuscript for publication; AND

Agreed to be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the work.

Corresponding Author

In multi-authored manuscripts, one author must be designated as the Corresponding Author, who is responsible for:

Managing all communication with the journal during submission, peer review, and publication.

Ensuring that all authors meet the authorship criteria.

Handling statements related to conflicts of interest, acknowledgments, and ethical compliance.

Responding to queries or critiques about the work after publication.

Equal / Dual Authorship

The journal allows dual first authorship or dual corresponding authorship if two authors have contributed equally. Such contributions must be clearly stated in the Author Contributions section

Group Authorship

For collaborative projects involving large groups, the group should decide which members qualify as authors. All listed authors must meet the authorship criteria and be able to take responsibility for the integrity of the work. Group names may also be included, provided individual contributors are identified.

Authorship Disputes

It is the collective responsibility of the authors to determine authorship before submission. Editors are not responsible for resolving authorship disputes. If disagreements arise, they should be addressed by the authors’ affiliated institutions in line with COPE guidance. How to spot authorship problems https://publicationethics.org/guidance/flowchart/how-spot-authorship-problems

Authorship Changes

Requests for changes in authorship (addition, removal, or rearrangement) can only be made before acceptance of the manuscript. Such requests must include a written statement of agreement signed by all listed authors and the author being added or removed.

Author Contributions (CRediT Taxonomy)

The journal requires authors to specify their contributions using the CRediT taxonomy CRediT credit.niso.org (e.g., Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing, Supervision, Funding Acquisition). This information should appear in the Declarations section of the manuscript.

ORCID

Authors are encouraged to provide their ORCID iD  https://orcid.org/  to ensure proper identification and linkage of their research outputs.

Acknowledgments

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged, with a description of their contribution (e.g., technical assistance, language editing, or general support).

Use of AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

AI tools and technologies cannot be listed as authors.

Authors may use AI or machine-learning tools to improve readability (e.g., grammar, spelling, formatting), but not to generate original scientific insights, data analysis, or conclusions.

 Failure to disclose AI use may be considered scientific misconduct.

AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Scientific Writing

AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship requires human responsibility and accountability, which AI technologies cannot assume.

Authors may use AI, machine learning, or similar tools only to support language editing, grammar correction, or readability improvements.

AI tools must not be used to generate original research ideas, design experiments, analyze or interpret data, or draw scientific or engineering conclusions. These remain the responsibility of the researchers.

Authors are fully accountable for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their manuscripts, regardless of whether AI tools were used.

Disclosure of AI Use

If AI or AI-assisted technologies are used, authors must include a disclosure statement in the Declarations section of the manuscript. Example:

“During the preparation of this work, the authors used [name of AI tool/service] for [purpose]. After using this tool, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the final version of the manuscript.”

Use of basic tools for spelling, grammar, or reference checking does not require disclosure.

Misconduct

Failure to properly disclose AI usage may be considered research or publication misconduct. Any such cases will be handled according to the COPE guidelines.Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
https://publicationethics.org/

⚠️ AI Use Policy
This journal does not permit AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, GitHub Copilot, Grammarly, QuillBot) to be listed as authors. Authors may use such tools only for language or grammar improvements, and any use must be properly disclosed in the manuscript. Authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of their work.

Conflicts of Interest

Definition

A conflict of interest (COI) in publishing arises when an individual’s objectivity or professional judgment related to a manuscript may be influenced by secondary interests such as personal, financial, institutional, or academic considerations. Conflicts may be real, potential, or perceived.

Examples include:

Financial interests: employment, consultancy, stock ownership, patents, or paid expert testimony.

Academic or professional relationships: collaborations, institutional affiliations, or direct competition.

Personal factors: close friendships, rivalries, or strong intellectual or ideological beliefs.

The journal requires complete transparency to ensure fairness and objectivity in the review and publication process.

 Authors

Authors must include a Conflict of Interest Statement  at the end of their manuscripts.

If there are no conflicts, the statement should read:
“The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest related to this work.”

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors disclose any conflicts.

Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts (e.g., recent collaborations, institutional affiliations, financial interests) when invited to evaluate a manuscript.

Reviewers with conflicts should decline the review or inform the editors, who will decide whether the review can proceed impartially.

Editors, Board Members, and Staff

Editors, board members, guest editors, and editorial staff must disclose any conflicts related to manuscripts they handle.

If a conflict exists, the editor should recuse themselves from the decision-making process.

Manuscripts submitted by editorial board members or guest editors will be handled by other independent editors to ensure impartiality.

Funding Disclosure

Authors must clearly state all funding sources that supported the work, including the names of funding agencies and relevant grant numbers, under the “Funding” section of the manuscript.

Authors must also specify the role (if any) of the sponsor in the study design, data analysis, manuscript preparation, or the decision to publish.

Conflicts of Interest (Short Version)

All authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial, academic, institutional, or personal conflicts of interest that could influence the evaluation or publication of a manuscript. If no conflicts exist, authors should state: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”

Funding sources must also be acknowledged in the manuscript. The journal follows COPE guidelines to ensure transparency and integrity in the peer review and publication process.

Editors, Board Members, Guest Editors, and Editorial Staff

Editors, board members, guest editors, and other editorial staff must disclose any conflicts of interest checklist form download link related to manuscripts they handle. If an editor’s personal, financial, institutional, or academic interests could compromise—or be perceived to compromise—their impartiality, they must notify the editorial office and recuse themselves from handling that submission. In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief will assign the manuscript to another qualified editor.

To ensure transparency and fairness, manuscripts submitted by editorial board members or guest editors are handled independently by other editors. The submitting editor will not be involved in the review or decision-making process.

Research Ethics

The journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity and ethical practice in engineering and applied sciences. Authors must ensure that their research complies with institutional, national, and international ethical guidelines.

Human Participants and Data

If the research involves human participants, surveys, or user studies, authors must follow recognized ethical standards (e.g., OECD Guidelines for Human Research and national ethics regulations).

Informed consent must be obtained from participants, and a statement of consent must be included in the manuscript.

For studies involving privacy-sensitive data (e.g., images, audio, or personal information), authors must obtain consent for publication.

👉 Reference: OECD – Good Practice for Human Research

Use of Animals in Research

If engineering research involves animal testing or biomedical engineering experiments, authors must comply with international standards such as the ARRIVE Guidelines and approval from an Animal Ethics Committee.

👉 Reference: ARRIVE Guidelines for Animal Research https://arriveguidelines.org/

Data Integrity and Safety Standards

Authors must ensure that all data, experiments, and simulations are reported honestly and transparently, in line with COPE standards.

Research involving hazardous materials, high-risk systems, or sensitive technologies must comply with accepted safety codes and engineering ethics standards.

👉 Reference:

COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics https://www.ieee.org/about/corporate/governance/ethics.html

IEEE Code of Ethics https://publicationethics.org/

Registration of Experimental Studies

Definition of Experimental Studies

The journal recognizes the importance of transparency and reproducibility in engineering research. An experimental study is any structured research project that prospectively tests a system, model, process, device, material, software, or prototype to evaluate its performance, safety, reliability, or effectiveness, with or without comparison or control groups.

Examples of engineering-related interventions include:

Development and testing of prototypes, devices, or materials

Simulation and modeling studies for structural, electrical, or mechanical systems

Software, algorithms, and AI/ML models

Process or design improvements in engineering applications

User studies or field trials to assess usability, ergonomics, or adoption of technology

The journal encourages authors to ensure that such studies are conducted in line with recognized standards of research integrity, safety, and professional engineering ethics (e.g., COPE https://publicationethics.org/,

IEEE Code of Ethics  https://www.ieee.org/about/corporate/governance/ethics.html,

 OECD Research Integrity Guidelines) https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/science-technology-and-innovation.html.

Where applicable, authors should also provide details of registration, approval, or compliance with relevant standards when reporting experimental research.

Engineering Research Ethics and Compliance Policies

The journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of research integrity and publication ethics. All submitted manuscripts must adhere to internationally recognized guidelines for ethical research and responsible publication practices. Authors are expected to comply with the following requirements:

1. Experimental Studies and Prototypes

All experimental work, simulations, and prototype testing must be conducted according to accepted engineering standards and best practices.

Authors should clearly describe the objectives, methodology, and safety considerations of their research.

Field trials and industrial experiments must comply with relevant institutional, governmental, or industrial regulations.

2. Ethical Approval for Human Participation

Studies involving human participants (such as usability testing, ergonomic studies, or surveys) must obtain approval from the relevant institutional ethics committee.Informed consent from participants must be obtained, and authors should confirm compliance in the manuscript.

3. Safety and Environmental Compliance

Authors must ensure that their research does not compromise health, safety, or the environment.

Experiments involving hazardous materials, electrical/electronic devices, or field trials must follow applicable safety standards (e.g., ISO, IEEE, or national standards).

Environmental impact assessments should be included when relevant.

4. Data Transparency and Availability

Authors are encouraged to deposit data, simulation codes, or source files in recognized public repositories (e.g., GitHub, Zenodo, Figshare) to promote transparency and reproducibility.

A data availability statement should be included in all submissions.

5.Conflict of Interest

All authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including financial, professional, or personal relationships that could influence the work.

If no conflicts exist, authors should state: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

6. Intellectual Property and Patents

Authors must clearly indicate if the work involves patented methods, proprietary data, or has been filed for intellectual property rights.

Any restrictions on sharing data or methods should be transparently disclosed.

7. Replication and Verification

Methodologies must be described in sufficient detail to allow independent replication and verification of the results.

Any limitations of the study should be acknowledged by the authors.

8. Compliance with Publication Ethics

The journal follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Plagiarism, data fabrication, image manipulation, or duplicate submissions will not be tolerated and may result in rejection, retraction, or blacklisting of authors.

All manuscripts are screened for originality using iThenticate plagiarism detection software.

Confidentiality

Editors, reviewers, and authors are required to maintain strict confidentiality regarding all aspects of the editorial and peer review process for submitted manuscripts. All correspondence exchanged during the review process is considered confidential and must not be shared outside the review process.

Reviewer Confidentiality:

Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential intellectual property. The content of the manuscript, including data, methods, prototypes, and simulation results, may not be used for personal or professional advantage. Reviewers should delete or destroy all copies of the manuscript after completing the review. If reviewers require consultation with colleagues for technical expertise, prior permission from the editorial office must be obtained.

Reviewer Anonymity:

Since the journal adopts a single-blind peer review system, reviewer identities must remain confidential. Reviewers may not disclose their identities to authors or contact authors directly without explicit permission from the editorial office.

Editorial Confidentiality:

The editorial team will not disclose details of submitted manuscripts to third parties, except in cases of suspected academic misconduct, plagiarism, or data fabrication. If confidentiality must be broken due to alleged misconduct, both authors and reviewers will be informed in advance.

Retention of Records:

If a manuscript is rejected, all copies should be removed from the editorial system unless retention is required for legal or ethical reasons, in which case author permission will be sought. For published manuscripts, the journal will retain records of the original submission, peer review reports, revised versions, and editorial correspondence for at least three years, or longer if required by institutional, publisher, or national regulations.

Data and Materials Availability Policy

The journal maintains a strict policy on the availability of data, code, models, and other research materials to ensure transparency, reproducibility, and long-term usability of engineering research.

Mandatory Data Availability Statement

All submissions must include a Data and Materials Availability Statement at the end of the manuscript. Manuscripts without this statement will not be accepted for publication.

Public Repositories

Wherever possible, authors are required to deposit data, source codes, simulation files, prototypes, and other supporting materials in a trusted and publicly accessible repository (e.g., Zenodo, GitHub, IEEE DataPort, Figshare, Dryad, DesignSafe-CI).

Repository links and dataset identifiers (DOI, accession number, or URL) must be included in the manuscript.

Restricted Access

If datasets or codes cannot be shared publicly due to confidentiality, security, intellectual property, or funding restrictions, authors must clearly state the reasons in their Data Availability Statement. Access requests must be directed to the corresponding author.

Use of Third-Party Data

If the research is based on third-party datasets or licensed materials, authors must acknowledge the original source and provide details for requesting access, if permissible.

No Data Generated

In cases where no new data, models, or materials were generated (e.g., theoretical or review articles), authors must clearly state: “No new data were generated or analyzed in this study.”

Editorial Oversight

The editorial office reserves the right to request raw data, codes, or additional documentation at any stage of the review process to verify the results. Failure to comply may lead to rejection or retraction of the manuscript.

Citation Policy

Authors must cite relevant literature to support any statement that relies on external sources of information in their manuscripts. Proper citation ensures academic integrity and gives credit to original contributors. Authors should adhere to the following guidelines when preparing their manuscripts:

Authors should cite original research articles rather than relying solely on review papers that cite the original work.

Authors must ensure that citations are accurate and relevant, i.e., they should support the statement made in the manuscript and must not misrepresent another work.

Authors should aim to cite a diverse range of sources, avoiding over-reliance on publications from only one country or region.

Authors should avoid using an excessive number of citations to support a single point.

Citation Manipulation

According to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) COPE: Citation Manipulation Guidelines, https://publicationethics.org/guidance/discussion-document/citation-manipulation citation manipulation refers to unethical practices where references are included only to increase citation counts without adding scholarly value. Such practices include:

Excessive self-citation of the author’s own work, solely to increase citation counts.

Excessive citation of the journal in which the author is publishing, solely to inflate the journal’s metrics.

Honorary or coercive citations, i.e., citing editors-in-chief, reviewers, or well-known researchers without legitimate academic relevance.

Citation stacking, where groups of authors or journals mutually cite each other to boost impact metrics.

Journal Policy on Citation Ethics

Citation manipulation will result in automatic rejection of the manuscript.

The journal reserves the right to report unethical practices to the authors’ institutions or funding bodies.

Any attempts by reviewers or editors to enforce coercive citations must be reported by the authors directly to the publisher.

Editors found to be engaging in citation manipulation will be considered in violation of best publication practices and may be removed from their positions following investigation.

The journal recognizes that legitimate self-citations may be necessary to provide continuity of research. However, all self-citations must be relevant and justified.

For more details, authors are encouraged to review the COPE discussion document: Citation Manipulation.Citation Manipulation.

References and Citation Formatting Policy

In addition to ethical requirements for citations, the journal maintains a strict formatting policy for references to ensure clarity, consistency, and international standards of scholarly publishing.

1. General Guidelines

References must be accurate, complete, and relevant to the content of the manuscript.

All cited works must appear in the reference list, and all entries in the reference list must be cited in the text.

Authors are responsible for verifying the accuracy of all references before submission.

2. Citation Style

The journal follows the IEEE citation style for all engineering and technology-related articles. Authors should adhere to the following rules:

In-text citations: References should be cited using numbers in square brackets, e.g., as shown in [3].

Reference order: References must be listed in the order they appear in the text (not alphabetically).

Reference format: Each reference should include author(s), title of the article or book, journal/conference name, volume, issue, page numbers, and year. DOI or URL should be added when available.

3. Examples of IEEE Reference Style

Journal article:
[1] A. Smith and B. Jones, “A study on renewable energy optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 456–467, 2021.

Conference paper:
[2] R. Kumar and L. Chen, “Machine learning for smart grid applications,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Energy Systems, Singapore, 2020, pp. 112–118.

Book:
[3] M. Johnson, Introduction to Structural Engineering, 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 2019.

Website/Online source:
[4] IEEE, “IEEE DataPort: Open data for research,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://ieee-dataport.org

4. Use of Reference Management Software

Authors are encouraged to use reference management software such as EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley to ensure proper formatting and consistency.

5. Citation Integrity

Improper citations, inaccurate references, or formatting inconsistencies may result in the manuscript being returned to the authors for correction before peer review.

Plagiarism
Plagiarism is not acceptable in the journal, and includes, but is not limited to, copying or reusing text, ideas, images or data from other sources without clear attribution, and goes against the principle of academic publishing. Reuse of parts of text from an author’s previous research publication without clear attribution is a form of self-plagiarism. When reusing text, all sources must be cited at the point they are used, and reuse of wording must be limited and be attributed or quoted in the text.

The journal uses iThenticate to screen submitted content for originality before publication. iThenticate checks submissions against millions of published research papers, and billions of web content. Any issues detected by the software will be addressed by a follow-up investigation in line with COPE guidelines (see COPE Plagiarism Guidelines)and if plagiarism is detected the manuscript may be rejected, corrected or retracted, as appropriate. In some cases, we may inform the authors’ institutions about the case.

We expect that the editors and peer reviewers will inform the journal about any concerns related to plagiarism at any stage of peer-review, publication, or post-publication. We also encourage readers to report suspicious plagiarism after publication. COPE has flowcharts for how to handle cases of potential plagiarism in a submitted manuscript or a published article.

Duplicate Publication Policy

The journal considers only original content, meaning that articles must not have been previously published or simultaneously submitted for publication elsewhere, including in a language other than English. If related materials are under consideration or in press in another venue, authors must disclose this in their cover letter.

If authors have used their own previously published work, or work that is currently under review, as the basis for a submitted manuscript, they must cite the previous articles and clearly indicate how the submitted manuscript differs from earlier work. The decision to publish or not publish such materials lies at the editor’s discretion. Reuse of the authors’ own figures or substantial amounts of text may require permission from the copyright holder, and the authors are responsible for obtaining such permissions.

The journal will consider the following exceptions if justified and declared upon submission:

Preprint servers: Posting a manuscript on a preprint server or an author’s personal/institutional website does not constitute prior publication. (See our Preprint Policy for more details.)

Theses: Academic theses, including those publicly available as a requirement of the awarding institution, are not considered duplicate publication.

Conference abstracts/posters: Abstracts or posters presented at meetings are allowed, but must be cited in the submission and mentioned in the cover letter.

Datasets: Sharing datasets publicly prior to manuscript submission will not preclude consideration. This practice is encouraged in line with open science and funder requirements.

Summary of clinical trial results in public registries: Posting trial results in publicly accessible registries is not considered duplicate publication. Authors must ensure that their clinical trial is registered in an accessible registry (see Registration of Clinical Trials policy).

Translations: The journal may consider publishing translated versions of material published elsewhere if permission has been obtained from the original publisher. Such works must clearly indicate that they are translated and republished under a CC BY license, with full reference to the original source.

If a manuscript is published and later found to be redundant, the editor will follow the COPE flowcharts and work with the publisher to retract the duplicate paper.

  1. Authorship Criteria
  2. Plagiarism and Originality
  3. Duplicate Publication
  4. Conflict of Interest
  5. Peer Review Policy
  6. Data and Code Availability
  7. Ethical Standards in Research
  8. Corrections, Retractions, and Withdrawals
  9. Open Access and Copyright
  10. Preprint Policy
  11. Archiving and Digital Preservation
  12. Adherence to COPE Guidelines

Misconduct Policy

The journal addresses any form of scientific misconduct on a case-by-case basis, guided by the standards of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)https://publicationethics.org/,WAME (World Association of Medical Editors), and ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors).

Misconduct Definition

The journal endorses the summary of misconduct as follows:

Falsification of data: Includes fabrication, deceptive selective reporting of findings, omission of conflicting data, or deliberate distortion of results.

Plagiarism: The use of another person’s words, ideas, or results without proper credit, presenting them as one’s own original work.

Improprieties of authorship: Excluding contributors, misrepresenting material as original in multiple publications, or including authors who did not contribute significantly.

Misappropriation of ideas: Improper use of confidential information obtained during peer review, grant review, or collaboration.

Violation of accepted research practices: Manipulation of experiments, biased statistical or analytical treatment, or misleading reporting of findings.

Regulatory non-compliance: Failure to follow laws or institutional guidelines related to funding, intellectual property, safety, or ethical research practices.

Inappropriate conduct in misconduct cases: False accusations, suppression of evidence, or retaliation against whistle-blowers.

Duplicate publication: Submitting or publishing the same work in multiple journals without disclosure or justification.

Lack of declaration: Failure to disclose conflicts of interest, funding, or affiliations.

Reference and Citation Misconduct

In addition to the above, the journal strictly monitors reference and citation ethics. Misconduct includes:

Citation manipulation: Adding irrelevant or excessive references to increase citation counts of particular authors, journals, or institutions.

Self-citation abuse: Excessive citation of one’s own prior work without clear scholarly justification.

Omission of relevant work: Deliberately failing to cite significant prior studies that are relevant to the submitted research.

Inaccurate citations: Citing sources that do not support the statement made or misrepresenting the content of a reference.

Ghost references: Inclusion of non-existent or fabricated references.

Improper formatting: Not following the journal’s reference style, which may lead to inconsistency and ambiguity in the scholarly record.

Dealing with Allegations of Misconduct

All manuscripts are screened using iThenticate (or equivalent plagiarism detection software) to ensure originality.

Reviewers are encouraged to report suspected misconduct, including unethical citation practices.

Readers may also report suspected cases related to published articles.

The editorial board follows COPE flowcharts in investigating all allegations. Sanctions may include rejection, retraction, or notification of the authors’ institutions, depending on severity.

Crossmark, Corrections, and Retractions Policy

The journal is committed to ensuring the integrity and accuracy of the scholarly record in the field of engineering. We adhere to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (COPE Websitehttps://publicationethics.org/) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) (ICMJE Website)  https://www.icmje.org/in handling corrections, retractions, and post-publication discussions.

   Crossmark

The journal participates in the Crossmark initiative by Crossref. Crossmark provides a reliable way for readers to verify whether a published article is the most up-to-date version. By clicking the Crossmark logo on an article, readers can confirm the document’s status and access additional publication details.

 Corrections

Errors are a natural part of scientific and engineering research. When identified, they will be corrected in a transparent manner following these principles:

Corrections will be issued promptly after confirmation of the error.

Correction notices will specify the exact changes made and include a link to the original article.

The original version of the article will remain accessible, accompanied by a correction note to inform readers.

For early online versions, changes may be made directly to the article with an audit trail of the edits and dates.

For articles already assigned to an issue, a formal correction notice will be published and linked to the original article.

Retractions

In rare cases, articles may need to be retracted. Retraction is not intended as punishment but as a way to maintain the integrity of the engineering research record. Articles may be retracted if:

Results are found to be unreliable due to errors, fabrication, or falsification (e.g., manipulated experimental data, incorrect simulations, or invalid models).

Plagiarism is identified.

Redundant or duplicate publication is detected.

Data, designs, or materials are used without appropriate authorization.

Copyright or legal issues are identified.

The peer review process was compromised.

Conflicts of interest were not disclosed, affecting the interpretation of results.

Retractions will follow these practices:

A retraction notice will be published, linked to the original article.

Retraction titles will clearly indicate the status of the article.

The retraction notice will specify the article title, the reason for retraction, and the party responsible for the retraction.

Articles will remain online for transparency, but marked clearly as retracted.

Preprint Policy

The journal supports open science and allows authors to deposit their manuscripts on preprint servers (e.g., arXiv, Engineering Archive, institutional repositories) at the following stages:

Original Version (Submitted Manuscript)

Accepted Manuscript (Post-Peer Review, Before Copyediting)

Published Version of Record

Authors must declare preprints during submission and provide DOIs or links where available. After publication, authors should update preprint records with the final DOI and citation.

For more information on preprint policies, see Sherpa Romeo (Sherpa Romeo Website).https://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/

 Archiving and Digital Preservation

To ensure long-term availability of engineering research, all published articles are archived in trusted digital repositories (e.g., Portico, CLOCKSS) and indexed in relevant engineering databases. Authors are encouraged to deposit their work in institutional repositories to meet funder requirements.

 Appeals and Complaints

Appeals: Authors may appeal editorial decisions by contacting the editorial office. Appeals should provide clear justification (e.g., factual clarifications, overlooked data, or concerns regarding the peer review process). Editors may seek additional peer review to make a final decision. The editor’s decision after an appeal is final.

Complaints: Complaints regarding editorial processes or publication ethics can be submitted to the editorial office. Complaints about ethical issues will be handled according to COPE guidelines. If the complaint involves an editor, it may be escalated to the publisher.

Post-Publication Discussion

The journal encourages scholarly dialogue even after publication. Readers, reviewers, or researchers may:

Report errors or ethical concerns to the editorial office.

Submit Comments, Letters to the Editor, or Technical Notes that critically discuss published work.

Engage in transparent discourse to strengthen the integrity of engineering research.

Additional Reference Section for Engineering Journals

Ethical Standards and Guidelines
This journal aligns with the following international ethics and publication guidelines:

COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) 

WAME (World Association of Medical Editors)

ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) 

IEEE Publication Ethics and Conduct Guidelines