All manuscripts are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process (reviewers do not know the authors' names, and the authors do not know who reviewed their manuscripts). The identities of both author and reviewer remain hidden. Each manuscript is reviewed by (at least two independent reviewers and a third to resolve any discrepancies between the first two reviewers).

The manuscripts accepted for review have not been submitted/published/under consideration anywhere in other conferences/journals. To find out about the process of publishing in the journal, please visit the Author Guide.

An invitation to review is sent to at least two independent reviewers (who should be experts in the scientific topic addressed in the manuscript). Reviewers are expected to respond positively or negatively to this invitation within seven days. Potential Reviewers who do not accept the invitation or take no action within the specified seven-day period shall be withdrawn from the invitation to review. Invitations are sent to new potential reviewers until they reach at least two.

Reviewers are given a maximum of 60 days to complete a manuscript evaluation. If all reviewers have decided on the manuscript before the 60 days set for the evaluation process, an editorial decision can be made when the final review is complete. Evaluation reports are carefully scrutinized, and an editorial decision is made. Confidential comments to the editor are welcome, but it is helpful if the main points are stated in the comments for transmission to the authors. If one reviewer's decision is positive and the other takes a negative decision, a third reviewer is appointed. The editorial decision is taken carefully, accurately and objectively, taking into account the decision of the third reviewer. Our reviewers, who participated in the review process, are asked to evaluate articles according to the Review Form.

In a response letter to revisions, the authors indicate whether or not they can make the corrections requested by the reviewers. Authors should make their point about corrections not being made. The response letter and revised manuscript are uploaded to the journal editorial platform. The reviewers make an editorial decision upon completion of the manuscript evaluation process, and the decision is communicated to the authors. The authors are given a maximum of one month to complete the revision to upload it to the journal editorial platform. A reminder is sent to the authors every seven days. Additional time can be given to authors if there is an acceptable justification. If there is no return after reminding the authors, the manuscript is rejected by an editorial decision. If reviewers decide to re-review the revision, it is forwarded to them. If the editor reviews and decide on the revision, the review is completed as soon as possible, and the editor's decision is made. In re-reviews, reviewers are given a 10-day review period for each review round.

Reviewers are responsible for acting promptly and adhering to the instructions for completing and submitting a review promptly. Failure to do so undermines the review process. Every effort should be made to complete the review within the time requested. Please see Duties of Reviewers for more details.