1. Introduction
At Techno India University Transactions on Intelligent Computing (TTIC), we are dedicated to ensuring the integrity, quality, and relevance of the research published in our journal. Our peer review process is designed to maintain transparency, fairness, and academic rigor, offering authors constructive feedback and fostering the dissemination of high-quality research.
2. Peer Review Process
TTIC adheres to a Double-Blind Peer Review system to ensure unbiased and confidential evaluation. The steps involved in the review process are outlined below:
a. Manuscript Submission and Initial Screening
Upon submission, the editorial team conducts a preliminary review to assess the manuscript’s relevance to the journal’s scope, adherence to submission guidelines, and overall quality. Submissions that do not meet basic requirements are returned to authors for revision or rejection.
b. Assignment of Reviewers
For manuscripts passing the initial screening, two or more independent expert reviewers are selected based on their subject-matter expertise. Reviewers are chosen to provide a comprehensive assessment from diverse perspectives while maintaining objectivity and confidentiality.
c. Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript on several critical aspects:
Originality: The uniqueness of the research and its contribution to the field of intelligent computing.
Methodology: The soundness of the research design, methods, and analysis.
Results and Discussion: Clarity, validity, and impact of the findings, including their implications for the field.
Presentation: Organization, readability, and overall quality of writing.
Relevance: How well the manuscript aligns with the journal’s aims and scope.
d. Decision and Feedback
Reviewers submit their feedback, recommending one of the following actions:
Accept: The manuscript meets all the criteria with minimal or no revisions required.
Minor Revisions: Small changes are necessary before final acceptance
Major Revisions: Substantial revisions are required for reconsideration.
Reject: The manuscript does not meet the standards of the journal.
The editorial team reviews the feedback, makes the final decision, and communicates it to the authors. Authors are provided with detailed reviewer comments to guide revisions, ensuring transparency and constructive dialogue throughout the process
3. Ethical Considerations
a. Confidentiality
All materials and correspondence related to the peer review process are kept confidential. Reviewers, authors, and editors are required to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript’s content and any discussions related to its review.
b. Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers are asked to disclose any potential conflicts of interest before agreeing to review a manuscript. If a conflict arises during the process, the reviewer is required to recuse themselves from evaluating the manuscript.
c. Plagiarism and Research Misconduct
The journal upholds the highest ethical standards and takes allegations of plagiarism or data fabrication very seriously. Manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using appropriate tools, and any suspected ethical violations are thoroughly investigated.
4. Timeliness of the Review Process
TTIC aims to provide timely and efficient peer review for all manuscripts. While the review process typically takes 4-6 weeks, the speed of the process depends on reviewer availability and the extent of required revisions. Authors are notified promptly at each stage, and we encourage authors to adhere to the journal’s submission deadlines to maintain a smooth and efficient workflow.
5. Acknowledgment of Reviewers
To recognize the invaluable contributions of our reviewers, TTIC provides formal acknowledgment in each volume. Additionally, reviewers are offered the opportunity to receive a Certificate of Appreciation for their contributions, and distinguished reviewers may be invited to join the editorial board or participate in other collaborative activities within the journal.
6. Conclusion
The peer review process at TTIC is essential to ensuring the publication of high-quality, impactful research in the field of intelligent computing. We are committed to maintaining the integrity of the review process and ensuring transparency, fairness, and constructive feedback for authors.