Editorial Policy and Publication Ethics
FORMATH currently publishes one issue per year consisting of papers mostly presented at its annual meeting that are considered suitable for publication. Papers considered for publications are not limited to those presented at the annual meeting. All submitted papers must be previously unpublished, they should be well-written, and we encourage grace as well as clarity. The papers should also be written in a style that is understandable to broad readers including students, researchers, policymakers and specialists. It must be noted that acceptance for publication is subject to a vigorous refereeing process. Also there are two categories for publication. "Scientific Category" emphasizes on scientific findings while "Discussion Category" is devoted to a new issue requiring scientific works. It is determined through the review process.
The FORMATH journal publication ethics is based on recommendations of COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors and Reviewers.
Authors: By submitting a manuscript, the author(s) warrant that the manuscript is their own, original work and that it has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. The authors have the right to appeal against any editorial decision. A statement with rebuttal should be motivated.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. The editor of our journal is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal should be published. The editor guides by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. The authors’ opinion may not always be supported by the editorial board of “Computational Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies”.
Reviewers: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. The review process may take approximately 2 months to be completed. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by reviewer without the express written consent of the author. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments. Any referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Peer reviewers’ identities are protected.