Reviewer Guidelines
These guidelines help reviewers prepare constructive, ethical, and useful peer-review reports for IJAICET submissions.
Review Criteria
- Scope and relevance: The manuscript should fit artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, computing, or emerging technologies.
- Originality: The submission should present a clear contribution and avoid plagiarism, redundant publication, or unsupported claims.
- Technical quality: Methods, experiments, analysis, algorithms, datasets, results, and discussion should be sound and reproducible where possible.
- Ethical compliance: Human data, sensitive data, third-party content, conflicts of interest, and funding disclosures should be handled transparently.
- Presentation quality: The paper should be organized, readable, properly referenced, and supported by clear figures, tables, and citations.
How to Write Review Comments
Review comments should be specific, respectful, and evidence-based. Reviewers should identify major issues separately from minor corrections and provide actionable suggestions where possible.
Confidential Comments to the Editor
Confidential comments should be used for concerns that should not be shared directly with authors, including suspected ethical issues, plagiarism concerns, conflicts of interest, or recommendation reasoning.
Decision Recommendations
- Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication with no or minimal changes.
- Minor revision: The manuscript is publishable after small corrections.
- Major revision: The manuscript requires substantial improvement before acceptance can be considered.
- Reject: The manuscript is unsuitable due to scope mismatch, serious quality issues, ethical concerns, or insufficient contribution.
Reviewer Ethics
Reviewers must not share, copy, use, or cite unpublished manuscript content for personal advantage. Reviewers should not contact authors directly about a manuscript under review.
Contact
Questions about review assignments may be sent to editor.ijaicet@gmail.com.
