Peer-Review Process
AICA Journal: Artificial Intelligence, Computing, and Application applies a double-blind peer-review process to maintain the quality, objectivity, and integrity of all manuscripts considered for publication.
1. Initial Editorial Screening
All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the editorial team. This initial screening considers the manuscript's relevance to the aims and scope of AICA Journal, compliance with the journal's submission requirements, originality, academic quality, and overall suitability for peer review.
Manuscripts that fall outside the journal's scope, do not meet basic academic or ethical standards, or require substantial improvement before review may be returned to the authors without proceeding to external peer review.
2. Double-Blind Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area.
The reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on aspects including:
- originality and significance of the research
- relevance to artificial intelligence, computing, or their applications
- appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology
- validity and clarity of the results
- quality of the analysis and discussion
- relevance and adequacy of the cited literature
- practical or scientific contribution of the work, and
- clarity and organization of the manuscript.
Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and academically responsible feedback to help authors improve their manuscripts.
The peer-review process is generally expected to take approximately 2–4 weeks, although the actual duration may vary depending on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, and the extent of revisions required.
3. Editorial Decision
After considering the comments and recommendations of the reviewers, the editor makes an editorial decision regarding the manuscript.
The possible decisions include:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
The final publication decision remains the responsibility of the editorial team based on the quality of the manuscript, reviewer evaluations, journal standards, and relevance to the scope of AICA Journal.
4. Revision
When revisions are required, authors are expected to carefully address the comments provided by the reviewers and editor.
Authors should submit a revised manuscript together with a clear response explaining how each comment has been addressed.
Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers when necessary, particularly when substantial revisions are required.
Multiple rounds of revision may be conducted when necessary to ensure that the manuscript meets the journal's academic and publication standards.
5. Final Decision and Publication
Once the manuscript has satisfactorily addressed the required revisions, the editor conducts a final evaluation.
Accepted manuscripts proceed to the editorial and production stages before publication in the appropriate issue of AICA Journal.
Acceptance for publication is based solely on the academic quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, and contribution of the manuscript. Editorial decisions are not influenced by the authors' institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, seniority, or other personal characteristics.
Review Ethics and Confidentiality
All manuscripts submitted to AICA Journal are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, or use information obtained through the review process for personal or professional advantage.
Reviewers should declare any potential conflict of interest that may affect their ability to provide an objective evaluation. When such a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the review assignment.
AICA Journal is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, confidential, and academically responsible peer-review process for all manuscripts submitted to the journal.
