Publication Process

PREDATECS: Public Research Journal of Engineering, Data Technology and Computer Science operates a rigorous peer-review process. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the academic quality of the publication process, including acceptance decisions, approval of Guest Editors and special issue topics, and new Editorial Board members.

A summary of the editorial process is given in the flowchart below. The following provides notes on each step.

Pre-check

  • Immediately after submission, this check is first performed by the Editor-in-Chief to assess:
    • Appropriateness of the manuscript to the journal/section/special issue;
    • Author's qualifications and background;
    • Reject obviously bad manuscripts.

The Section Editor, will be notified of the submission and invited to review and recommend reviewers.

Peer-to-Peer Review

All articles submitted to PREDATECHS will be reviewed by double-blind review method. Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and authors also do not know the identity of the reviewers (double-blind review method). In general, each article will be reviewed by one to two reviewers.

The responses of the reviewers will be the basis for the Editor to conclude

  • Revision Required
  • Accept Submission
  • Reject Submission

An article is rejected for publication due to various considerations, among others:

  • The article does not fit the scope
  • The article does not follow the rules of scientific writing / does not follow the author's guidelines
  • Fundamental methodological errors
  • The author refuses to provide suggestions for improvement given by the reviewer without a logical basis.
  • There are indications of plagiarism of more than 20%

Editor's Decision

The decision to accept a manuscript, after peer review, is made by the Editor, either the Editor-in-Chief, Section Editor, or other appropriate Editorial Board member. When making editorial decisions, we expect the Editor-in-Chief to check the following:

  • The suitability of the selected reviewers;
  • Adequacy of reviewer comments and author responses;
  • The overall scientific quality of the paper.

The editor can choose from: accept, reject, request revisions from the authors, request additional reviewers. If there is a suspicion that a paper may contain plagiarism, the editor will check it using turnitin software. Reviewers make recommendations, and the Editor-in-Chief is free to disagree with their views. If they do, they must justify their decision, to the benefit of the authors. Editorial independence is very important and IRPI does not interfere with the editorial decisions of PREDATECS. In particular, no paper is published without the approval of the editor-in-chief.

Revision

In cases where only minor revisions are recommended, authors are usually asked to revise the paper before referring to copyediting. The article may or may not be sent to the reviewers after the authors have revised, depending on whether the reviewers request to see the revised version. Apart from exceptional circumstances, we allow a maximum of two rounds of major revisions per manuscript.

Production

PREDATECS performs production on all manuscripts, including language editing if required, copy editing and conversion to XML. Language editing is done by professional English editing staff. In the small number of cases where extensive editing or formatting is required, we charge the author an additional fee (with prior approval from the author). Authors are also free to use other English editing services, or consult with native English-speaking colleagues-the latter being our preferred option.