Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement
The International Conference on Theoretical and Applied Computer Science and Engineering (ICTACSE) is committed to ensuring ethics in publication. Conformance to standards of ethical behaviour is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher. Before submitting or reviewing a paper please make sure you read the Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement.
The ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Duties of Editors
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the submitted manuscripts should be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Editors should evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit without regard to author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Editor and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in editor's own research without the author’s explicit written consent.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may also assist authors in improving their manuscripts.
Any invited 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 the invitation to review.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must 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 inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also inform the editors of 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 who have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscripts should decline the invitation to review.
Duties of Authors
Authors 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 manuscript. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with the manuscript for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
Authors should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be provided. 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. In case 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 in the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
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 authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.