The Journal of Intelligent Computing and Autonomous Systems (JICAS) follows a strict and transparent peer review policy to ensure the quality, originality, and scientific integrity of all published research.
All submitted manuscripts are evaluated based on their technical contribution, novelty, clarity, relevance to the journal scope, and overall scientific merit. The review process is designed to provide fair, unbiased, and constructive feedback to authors.
Review Model
The journal follows a double-blind peer review process, where:
- The identities of authors are not disclosed to reviewers
- The identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors
This ensures impartial evaluation and eliminates potential bias during the review process.
Review Process
The peer review process includes the following stages:
- Initial Editorial Screening
Each submission is first reviewed by the editorial team to ensure it aligns with the journal scope and meets basic quality standards.
- Assignment to Reviewers
Suitable manuscripts are assigned to subject experts in relevant research areas.
- Double-Blind Review Evaluation
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:
- Originality and novelty
- Technical correctness
- Methodology and analysis
- Clarity of presentation
- Relevance to the journal scope
- Reviewer Recommendations
Reviewers provide one of the following recommendations:
- Accept
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Reject
- Author Revision (if required)
Authors are given the opportunity to revise their manuscript based on reviewer comments.
- Final Editorial Decision
The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor based on reviewer feedback and revision quality.
Review Standards
The journal ensures that all reviews are:
- Confidential and unbiased
- Constructive and professional
- Based on academic and technical merit
- Free from conflicts of interest
Reviewers are expected to maintain ethical responsibility and disclose any potential conflicts before accepting a manuscript for review.
Review Timeline
The typical review duration is 2 to 4 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity. The journal strives to ensure timely communication and efficient processing of all submissions.