A peer-reviewed journal published by K. N. Toosi University of Technology

Article review process 

A) The initial assessment considering the RPE criteria (up to one week)
  • All submitted manuscripts are checked for the proper structure based on the "Paper Format" of the journal.
  • Return the article to the author for structural/format modifications (if any).
  • Articles are checked for similarity through Grammarly plagiarism checker to ensure their authenticity and originality.
  • Each manuscript is reviewed by an Associate Editor who decides on the appropriateness of the article's content and the scope of the journal.  If they don’t match, the manuscript will be rejected. Authors of the manuscripts rejected at this step will be informed as soon as possible. If the manuscript matches the scope of the journal and passes the initial quality check, it will be sent to the editorial board to suggest the referees.
B)  Single-blind review process (6 weeks on average )

Articles that pass the initial review step will be sent to professional referees through the following process:

  • The Editor may seek the advice of at least two referees, chosen in consultation with appropriate members of the Editorial Board, from among experts in the field of specialization of the paper. These referees are not necessarily the author's recommended referees in the submission process. Invitation of the reviewers and waiting for receiving of the acceptance takes one week.
  • If any of the invited reviewers declines, new reviewers will be invited.
  • Referees who have accepted the refereeing are asked to send their comment on the originality and scientific correctness of the work to the editor.
  • E-mails are sent to the referees within one week and they are reminded of the deadline.
  • If the referees didn’t assess the manuscript in due time or their referee was not in line with the promotion of the manuscript, new referee/referees will be assigned and the review process continues.
  • The time (the acceptance date of reviewing to sending the comments) taken by this step will vary (6 weeks on average), depending on such factors as the availability of appropriate referees and the cooperation of referees in sending their comments and decisions on time.
C) Making Initial Decision (one week)

A referee may recommend acceptance, acceptance with minor corrections; acceptance conditional on the successful completion of a more extensive revision; re-evaluation following a major revision that may involve extensions to the original manuscript; or rejection. According to the referees' suggestion of the manuscript evaluation, the initial decision is based on one of the following cases:

  • If all the referees approve that the manuscript meets the journal criteria, it will be placed in the articles waiting list for publication.
  • If one of the referees approve the article and the other reject it, the opinion of another referee will be asked. Final decision will be made by the Editorial Board based on the majorities’ opinion.
  • Based on general and specific comments of the referees, a revised article may be asked. When invited to prepare a revised manuscript with a specific deadline, it is important for the author to prepare responses to each specific comment or suggestion in an itemized fashion. When submitting a revision, as well as including a point-by-point response, highlighting the text where the revisions were made are required (4 Weeks for resubmission). If these requirements are not included, the revision will be sent back to the author for completion. The revised article may need to be reviewed by the referees. Final review and decision is made by the Editorial Board.
  • Selection of articles for publication in the journal after the arbitration process is the responsibility of the editorial Board, so the referee’s opinions will be reviewed for decision-making. As a result, the editorial staff and editor may reject diagnosed poorly reviewed articles and invite a new reviewer.
  • In the case where the referees asked for a second round of review, the articles will be sent to the referee to evaluate the new version of the paper (4 week). Otherwise, the Editor will adopt the revised version of the paper with the referees’ comments.
  • Authors needing additional time beyond the maximum revision extension should withdraw their submission. When the authors are ready, they can re-submit their revised manuscript under a new manuscript number. Resubmitted manuscripts will be treated as revisions: the same review team will be invited to manage the resubmitted paper; however, as with any revision, there is no guarantee that all members of the previous review team will be available to evaluate the revision.
D) Final decision (1 week)

Based on the mentioned reviewing process and the comments of the referees on the initial manuscript and the revised one (if any), the editor makes his/her final decision and informs the authors.

E) After Acceptance

Upon acceptance the following process is done:

  • The manuscript will be exported to Production to undergo typesetting (1 week).
  • The authors will receive the final edition of the Galley Proof asking to confirm the contents (3 days).
  • After checking the Galley Proof by the authors, the article will be processed for publishing and a volume and issues will be allocated to the paper and publish online.

The waiting time for publishing the papers depends on the number of accepted papers in the journal. However, the papers are available in the "Article in Press" section as soon as their galley proof is prepared. At this step, each article will be assigned a DOI number.

After completing the number of articles in each volume, the article can be downloaded as a PDF file for free on the journal site.

Peer-reviewing process flow diagram of RPE