Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

  • Algorithms and Data Structure, Software Tools and Environments;
  • Bio-Informatics;
  • Computational Intelligence;
  • Computer Modeling and Simulation;
  • Cyber and Homeland Security;
  • Data Communications and Networking;
  • Data Mining, Knowledge Bases and Ontology;
  • Digital Signal Processing;
  • Distributed Systems and Remote Control;
  • Education in Computing;
  • Embedded Systems;
  • High Performance Computing, GRIDs, Parallel and Distributed Computing;
  • Human-Computer Interaction;
  • Image Processing and Pattern Recognition;
  • Intelligent Robotics Systems;
  • Internet of Things;
  • IT Project Management;
  • Wireless Systems.

 

Section Policies

Algorithms and Data Structure, Software Tools and Environments

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Bio-Informatics

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Computational Intelligence

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Computer Modeling and Simulation

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Cyber and Homeland Security

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Data Communications and Networking

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Data Mining, Knowledge Bases and Ontology

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Digital Signal Processing

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Distributed Systems and Remote Control

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Education in Computing

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Embedded Systems

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

High Performance Computing, GRIDs, Parallel and Distributed Computing

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Human-Computer Interaction

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Image Processing and Pattern Recognition

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Intelligent Robotics Systems

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Internet of Things

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

IT Project Management

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Wireless Systems

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Each coming paper is reviewed by the Editorial Board in the following two stages. Firstly, it’s a fast preliminary review. If the paper does not meet the minimal requirements (its topic is beyond the Journal scope or paper content corresponds to a low scientific level), the authors get a prompt refusal. Also the paper is checked for plagiarism. Papers with a low level of originality, i.e. whole plagiarism / plagiarism-in-part / self-plagiarism are rejected.  Only original papers that have not previously been published in other journals/conference proceedings can be published in the Journal. In addition, the Journal staff has a list of author’s offenders, the so-called "black list", in particular:

• When the authors send papers that have already been published;
• Borrowed papers;
• Papers that are sent by mass mailing, i.e., when the author sends papers by single e-mail message simultaneously to several journals by cc.

If the paper passes the all minimal requirements above it goes to a second stage of the reviewing process. The reviewing form has the two separate chapters: Comments for Authors and Comments for the Editorial Board correspondingly. Reviewers are evaluating the paper using grades from 1 to 5 (1 = very poor, 2 = poor, 3 = adequate, 4 = good, 5 = excellent). So the paper is evaluating on following items: paper relevancy to Journal topics, importance to the field paper organization (structuring) and clarity, originality, state-of-the-arts description , practical value, technical correctness, English grammar and style. Reviewers also check out the predecessor’s works quoting. Moreover reviewers examine abstracts clarity and readability, and keyword matching to comment.

Reviewers are selected according to their registered areas of interests within the Journal’s topics. Each paper is evaluated by two reviewers at least. If both reviews are negative the paper is rejected, and authors get a motivated refusal along with reviews remarks.
are positive(Accept) then the Technical Editor sends to authors the acceptation letter. If both reviewers suggest just a minor revision then the Technical Editor sends to authors all remarks and comments asking them to revise the paper.

If either reviewers (or just one of them) suggest a major revision then the Technical Editor sends to authors all remarks and comments asking them to revise the paper. Upon receiving the revised paper the Technical Editor sends it to corresponding reviewers for checking.

If the opinions of two reviewers are opposite, the paper goes to two additional reviewers. Upon receiving just one negative additional review the reviewing process is over, the paper is rejected and authors get a corresponding letter from the Technical Editor along with all reviewers’ remarks. If both additional reviews are positive, then the Technical Editor sends to authors all remarks and comments asking them to revise the paper. Upon receiving the revised paper the Technical Editor sends it to corresponding reviewers for checking.

 

Publication Frequency

Journal is published quaterly in: March, June, September and December

 

Publication Ethics and Misconduct

The Editorial Board of “International Journal of Computing” concurs with the ideas and rules on academic writing and academic ethics, according to the work by Miguel Roig (2003, 2006) “Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing”, available online at http://www.cse.msu.edu/~alexliu/plagiarism.pdf/.

The Editorial Board makes explicit the nature of unethical academic practices to potential authors of the journal. Reviewers and readers are also informed of guidelinesto insure the need for compliancein academic writing. Editors practice the useof blind refereeing by reviewers on all manuscripts, and adhere to the guidelines explicitly highlighted by COPE http://publicationethics.org.