Publication Ethics

The Journal of Emerging Paradigms in Computing Systems (JEPCS) is committed to maintaining high standards of integrity, transparency, confidentiality, fairness, and accountability throughout the scholarly publishing process.

The journal follows internationally recognized principles of publication ethics and the ethical guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These principles apply to authors, reviewers, editors, and all other individuals involved in the submission, review, and publication process.

1. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors submitting manuscripts to JEPCS are expected to follow accepted standards of responsible scholarly conduct.

Authors must ensure that:

  • the submitted work is original;

  • all data, results, figures, tables, algorithms, software, and other research materials are reported accurately;

  • the manuscript is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal;

  • all sources and prior work are appropriately cited;

  • all individuals who satisfy authorship requirements are included as authors;

  • individuals who do not qualify for authorship are not listed as authors;

  • all listed authors have approved the submitted manuscript;

  • funding sources and competing interests are disclosed;

  • relevant ethical approvals have been obtained where required; and

  • significant errors discovered after submission or publication are reported promptly to the journal.

Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate manipulation of research results, and deliberate misrepresentation are considered serious breaches of publication ethics.

2. Originality and Plagiarism Policy

JEPCS requires submitted manuscripts to contain original scholarly work.

All manuscripts may be screened using appropriate plagiarism and similarity-detection software before or during the editorial review process.

The following similarity requirements apply:

  • The overall similarity index must be less than 15%.

  • Similarity from any single source must not exceed 5%.

Manuscripts exceeding these thresholds may be returned to the authors for correction or rejected, depending on the nature and extent of the similarity.

Authors are responsible for appropriately citing all material taken from other sources, including text, ideas, figures, tables, datasets, algorithms, software, and other intellectual contributions.

Copying another person's work without proper attribution constitutes plagiarism.

Reusing substantial portions of an author's own previously published material without appropriate citation and disclosure may constitute self-plagiarism or redundant publication.

Editors may also evaluate the nature of detected similarity, because properly quoted material, references, standard methodological terminology, and other legitimate overlap may appear in similarity reports.

3. Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Writing

Authors may use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies during manuscript preparation, but all substantive use must be transparently disclosed.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, references, data, analyses, and conclusions of the submitted work.

AI tools cannot be listed as authors.

Routine spelling, grammar, formatting, and reference-management tools do not require disclosure

AI tools must not be used to fabricate:

  • research data;

  • experimental results;

  • citations or references;

  • images or figures presented as authentic research evidence;

  • interpretations or conclusions; or

  • other scholarly content.

Routine software used exclusively for spelling checking, reference formatting, typesetting, or conventional non-generative technical editing is not treated as authorship.

4. Multiple, Redundant, and Concurrent Publication

Authors must not submit substantially the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously.

Submitting the same work concurrently to multiple journals constitutes unethical publishing behaviour.

Authors must disclose any closely related:

  • journal manuscripts;

  • conference papers;

  • preprints;

  • technical reports;

  • theses or dissertations; or

  • previously published versions of the work.

Previously published material must be cited appropriately.

5. Extended Versions of Conference Papers

JEPCS recognizes that research in computing is frequently presented initially at conferences.

An extended journal manuscript based on a conference publication may be considered when it contains a substantial amount of new scholarly contribution.

Authors must:

  • cite the original conference paper;

  • clearly disclose the relationship between the conference paper and journal submission;

  • describe the additional contribution in the submission;

  • include substantial new analysis, methodology, experiments, results, theoretical development, or discussion; and

  • obtain permission for any copyrighted material reused from the conference publication where required.

The editorial team will determine whether the extension provides sufficient additional contribution for consideration as a journal article.

6. Authorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the research.

All authors should:

  • contribute meaningfully to the conception, design, implementation, analysis, interpretation, or preparation of the research;

  • participate sufficiently to take responsibility for their contribution;

  • review and approve the submitted version; and

  • approve the final version before publication.

Guest authorship, honorary authorship, gift authorship, and ghost authorship are not acceptable.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate contributors are included and that all listed authors have approved the submission.

7. Changes in Authorship

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after manuscript submission must be supported by a clear explanation.

Such requests should normally include written agreement from all authors affected by the change.

The journal reserves the right to request additional evidence before approving an authorship modification.

Authorship changes after acceptance will be permitted only under exceptional circumstances.

8. Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must appropriately acknowledge the work of others.

Publications that have materially influenced the submitted research should be cited.

Information obtained privately through correspondence, discussion, confidential review, or other restricted communication must not be used without appropriate authorization.

Authors should not cite irrelevant literature solely for the purpose of increasing citation counts.

9. Research Data and Reporting Standards

Authors should present an accurate account of the research performed and an objective discussion of its significance.

Underlying data should be represented accurately.

Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour.

Where appropriate, authors should retain:

  • datasets;

  • experimental records;

  • source code;

  • simulation configurations;

  • trained models;

  • research instruments; and

  • other supporting materials.

The journal may request relevant supporting information when necessary to evaluate research integrity.

10. Data Fabrication and Falsification

JEPCS does not tolerate fabrication or falsification.

Fabrication includes inventing research data, experimental observations, measurements, participants, results, or other information that did not actually exist.

Falsification includes inappropriate alteration, omission, manipulation, or misrepresentation of research materials, processes, images, data, or results.

Confirmed fabrication or falsification may result in rejection, retraction, notification of relevant institutions, or other appropriate action.

11. Image and Figure Integrity

Images, graphs, figures, screenshots, and other visual research materials must accurately represent the reported research.

Digital adjustment is acceptable only when it does not alter the scientific meaning of the material.

Authors must not:

  • selectively remove or add research features;

  • manipulate images to misrepresent results;

  • combine images in a misleading manner; or

  • present synthetic or altered material as authentic experimental evidence.

Editors may request original files where concerns arise.

12. Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants, identifiable personal information, user studies, surveys, interviews, biomedical data, or other ethically regulated activities must comply with applicable ethical standards.

Where required, authors must provide information regarding:

  • ethics committee or institutional review approval;

  • approval/reference number;

  • informed consent;

  • participant privacy; and

  • confidentiality procedures.

Authors must ensure that personally identifiable information is not published without appropriate authorization.

13. Research Involving Animals

Research involving animals must comply with applicable ethical, institutional, and legal requirements.

Where ethical approval is required, the approving authority and relevant approval information should be reported in the manuscript.

Authors should demonstrate that appropriate measures were taken to minimize unnecessary animal suffering.

14. Hazards and Safety

If the research involves chemicals, procedures, software, cybersecurity experiments, devices, biological materials, or other activities presenting unusual risks, authors should clearly identify relevant hazards.

Research involving cybersecurity, penetration testing, malware, vulnerability exploitation, surveillance, or sensitive computing systems must be conducted responsibly and in accordance with applicable ethical and legal requirements.

15. Competing Interests

Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation.

Examples include:

  • employment;

  • consultancy;

  • stock ownership;

  • honoraria;

  • patents;

  • commercial relationships;

  • research funding;

  • institutional relationships;

  • personal relationships;

  • academic competition; and

  • recent collaborations.

Where no competing interest exists, authors should provide an appropriate declaration.

16. Funding Disclosure

All relevant sources of financial support should be disclosed.

Authors should identify the role of funding organizations, where applicable, in:

  • study design;

  • data collection;

  • analysis;

  • interpretation;

  • manuscript preparation; and

  • decisions regarding publication.

17. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Peer reviewers play an important role in maintaining scholarly quality.

Reviewers must:

  • conduct reviews objectively;

  • maintain manuscript confidentiality;

  • provide constructive and evidence-based comments;

  • identify relevant uncited literature where appropriate;

  • disclose competing interests;

  • decline reviews where they lack sufficient expertise;

  • decline reviews they cannot reasonably complete within the required period;

  • avoid personal criticism of authors;

  • avoid using unpublished information for personal benefit; and

  • notify editors of suspected ethical problems.

Reviewers should alert the editor when they identify possible:

  • plagiarism;

  • duplicate publication;

  • fabricated data;

  • manipulated results;

  • inappropriate citation practices; or

  • other forms of misconduct.

18. Confidentiality of Peer Review

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers must not share, reproduce, distribute, or discuss submitted manuscripts with unauthorized individuals.

Unpublished information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal, academic, commercial, or competitive advantage.

JEPCS follows a single-anonymous peer-review model for peer-reviewed article types. Under this model, the names and affiliations of the authors are visible to reviewers, while the identities of reviewers remain confidential and are not disclosed to the authors.

Reviewers must not reveal their identity to authors within review comments, annotated manuscripts, uploaded review files, or other communications associated with the peer-review process.

19. Reviewer Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any relationship that could interfere with impartial evaluation.

Potential conflicts include:

  • recent collaboration with an author;

  • employment at the same institution;

  • direct supervisory relationships;

  • personal relationships;

  • financial interests;

  • academic rivalry; or

  • involvement in closely competing research.

When uncertainty exists, the reviewer should disclose the potential conflict to the editor.

20. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for maintaining the integrity and fairness of the editorial process.

Editorial decisions should be based on:

  • originality;

  • scholarly significance;

  • technical quality;

  • methodological soundness;

  • relevance to JEPCS;

  • ethical compliance; and

  • clarity of presentation.

Editors must not discriminate on the basis of personal characteristics or irrelevant affiliations.

21. Editorial Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must protect confidential information concerning submitted manuscripts.

Information about a manuscript should be disclosed only to individuals legitimately involved in the editorial and peer-review process.

Unpublished material must not be used by editors for their own research or personal advantage without appropriate permission.

22. Editorial Competing Interests

Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have a significant competing interest.

Such circumstances may include:

  • recent collaboration with the authors;

  • employment at the same institution;

  • supervisory relationships;

  • financial interests;

  • close personal relationships; or

  • significant academic conflicts.

An independent editor should handle such submissions.

23. Editorial Independence

Acceptance or rejection decisions must be made independently on scholarly grounds.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by:

  • publication charges;

  • fee waivers;

  • advertising;

  • sponsorship;

  • commercial relationships;

  • institutional status; or

  • personal relationships.

24. Peer Review Manipulation

JEPCS does not tolerate attempts to manipulate the peer-review process.

Prohibited practices include:

  • providing false reviewer identities;

  • providing fabricated reviewer email addresses;

  • impersonating reviewers;

  • influencing reviewers improperly;

  • coordinating fraudulent reviews; or

  • interfering with editorial systems.

Evidence of peer-review manipulation may lead to immediate rejection and further investigation.

25. Citation Manipulation

Authors, reviewers, and editors must not attempt to manipulate citation metrics.

Authors should cite only literature relevant to the manuscript.

Reviewers should not require citation of their own work unless the citation is genuinely necessary for scholarly reasons.

Editors must not pressure authors to cite articles from JEPCS solely to increase journal citation metrics.

26. Corrections

A correction may be issued when an error is identified in a published article that affects its accuracy or interpretation but does not invalidate the principal findings.

Corrections will be clearly linked to the original article.

The original scholarly record should remain accessible whenever appropriate.

27. Retractions

A published article may be retracted when reliable evidence indicates that:

  • the findings are substantially unreliable;

  • plagiarism has occurred;

  • significant fabrication or falsification has occurred;

  • duplicate publication has occurred;

  • peer review was manipulated;

  • research was conducted unethically;

  • copyright has been seriously infringed; or

  • other serious publication misconduct has occurred.

A retraction notice should clearly identify the article and explain the reason for retraction.

Retracted articles should remain identifiable as part of the scholarly record rather than being silently removed.

28. Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued when serious questions have been raised about a publication but available evidence is inconclusive or an investigation is ongoing.

The notice may subsequently be replaced by a correction, retraction, or other appropriate editorial action once the matter has been resolved.

29. Withdrawal of Manuscripts

Authors who wish to withdraw a manuscript should submit a formal request explaining the reason for withdrawal.

Manuscripts should not be submitted to another journal while they remain under active consideration by JEPCS.

Withdrawal requests made after substantial editorial or peer-review work has been completed may require additional editorial assessment.

30. Errors Identified by Authors

When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their submitted or published work, they must promptly notify the editorial office.

Authors are expected to cooperate with editors in correcting or retracting the article where necessary.

31. Suspected Misconduct

JEPCS takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously.

When credible concerns are raised, the journal may:

  1. conduct an initial assessment;

  2. contact the authors for clarification;

  3. request supporting data or documentation;

  4. obtain confidential expert advice;

  5. suspend the editorial process;

  6. contact relevant institutions or authorities where appropriate; and

  7. issue a correction, rejection, expression of concern, or retraction depending on the outcome.

Allegations will be handled as confidentially and fairly as reasonably possible.

32. Complaints

Complaints relating to:

  • editorial conduct;

  • peer review;

  • publication procedures;

  • ethical concerns; or

  • published content

may be submitted to the journal's editorial office.

Complaints will be considered objectively and, where practicable, reviewed by an individual who was not directly responsible for the disputed decision.

33. Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant factual, procedural, or ethical issue materially affected the outcome.

An appeal should clearly explain the grounds for reconsideration and provide supporting evidence.

Disagreement with reviewer comments alone does not necessarily constitute sufficient grounds for an appeal.

The decision following an appropriately reviewed appeal will normally be considered final.

34. Copyright and Permissions

Authors must ensure that they have permission to reproduce any copyrighted material included in their manuscript.

This may include:

  • figures;

  • tables;

  • images;

  • substantial text extracts;

  • questionnaires;

  • datasets; and

  • third-party software or other protected content.

Authors are responsible for obtaining necessary permissions before publication.

35. Copyright Infringement

JEPCS will investigate credible allegations of copyright infringement.

Where infringement is confirmed, appropriate measures may include:

  • manuscript rejection;

  • correction;

  • removal of infringing material;

  • retraction; or

  • other necessary action.

36. Ethical Oversight

Ethical concerns arising from submitted or published research will be evaluated according to the nature of the research and applicable scholarly standards.

Where appropriate, additional documentation may be requested from authors before an editorial decision is made.

37. Post-Publication Discussion

JEPCS supports responsible scholarly discussion after publication.

Readers, researchers, authors, and other interested parties may report substantive concerns regarding published articles to the editorial office.

Credible concerns will be assessed and appropriate action taken where necessary.

38. Preservation of the Scholarly Record

Corrections, retractions, and other post-publication notices will be handled in a manner that preserves the transparency of the scholarly record.

Published material will not normally be removed solely because concerns have arisen.

Removal may be considered only under exceptional circumstances involving significant legal, privacy, security, or safety concerns.

39. Cooperation with Investigations

Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to cooperate with legitimate investigations into suspected publication or research misconduct.

The journal may request:

  • original data;

  • ethics approvals;

  • authorship documentation;

  • source files;

  • similarity reports; or

  • other supporting information.

Failure to cooperate may be taken into account when determining appropriate editorial action.

40. Policy Enforcement

Failure to comply with these policies may result in one or more of the following:

  • return of the manuscript for correction;

  • rejection of the manuscript;

  • suspension of peer review;

  • withdrawal of acceptance;

  • publication of a correction;

  • publication of an Expression of Concern;

  • retraction;

  • restrictions on future submissions; or

  • notification of relevant institutions or authorities where warranted.

The appropriate response will depend on the nature and seriousness of the issue.