Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Informatics (JIEI) follows a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the scientific quality, originality, technical validity, and ethical integrity of all published articles.

Review Model

The journal follows a double-blind peer-review process, where the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential during the review process.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first screened by the editorial office and handling editor to check:

  • Suitability to the journal scope.
  • Completeness of submission files.
  • Compliance with author guidelines.
  • Plagiarism similarity level, AI content.
  • Ethical declarations.
  • Quality of language and structure.
  • Basic technical soundness.

Manuscripts that are outside the scope, incomplete, poorly prepared, ethically problematic, and technically weak may be rejected at the editorial screening stage without external review.

 

Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Additional reviewers may be invited if the reviews are conflicting or if specialized technical assessment is required.

 

Review Criteria

Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and novelty.
  • Technical correctness.
  • Clarity of problem statement.
  • Quality of literature review.
  • Soundness of methodology.
  • Adequacy of experiments/simulations.
  • Reproducibility of results.
  • Validity of conclusions.
  • Quality of figures, tables, and equations.
  • Ethical compliance.
  • Relevance to the journal scope.

Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports and JIEI's editorial assessment, the manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

  • Accept.
  • Minor revision.
  • Major revision.
  • Reject and resubmit.
  • Reject.

The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

Revision Policy

Authors must submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed response letter (response to reviewers) explaining how each reviewer comment has been addressed. If a comment is not accepted, the manuscript may reject due to lack of technical justification. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

 Confidentiality

JIEI's Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Manuscript content must not be shared, used, or discussed outside the review process.

Conflict of Interest in Peer Review

Reviewers must decline review invitations if they have conflicts of interest, including recent collaboration, institutional connection, personal relationship, financial interest, or direct competition with the authors.

Review Timeline

The journal aims to complete the first review decision within 1 to 4 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity. However, quality review will be prioritized over speed.