Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
The International Conference on Intelligent and Innovative Computing Applications (ICONIC) publication ethics and malpractice statement are based almost wholly on the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) standards.
ICONIC is committed to follow the best publication practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions. Any kind of unethical behaviours are not tolerated and the conference has a zero tolerance to plagiarism.
ICONIC uses the iThenticate software, which checks submissions against millions of published research papers, documents on the web and other relevant sources. Furthermore, authors who submit papers to this conference must ensure and confirm that the article is original.
Duties of Editor
Publication Decisions: Based on the review report, the editor has complete responsibility and authority to accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript.
Review of Manuscripts: Each submission that is submitted is initially evaluated by the editor for originality by making use of online services. Following a preliminary desk review, the manuscript is forwarded to three different reviewers who will make a recommendation to accept, accept with minor corrections, accept with major corrections, re-submit for review or to reject the manuscript. In order to allow reviewers to determine potential cases of conflict-of-interest, a single-blind review approach is used. Thus, authors do not know who has reviewed their articles but reviewers know whose paper they are reviewing. As soon as two positive reviews are obtained, the manuscript is usually accepted for publication in the conference proceedings. If one positive review and one negative review is obtained, the editor waits until the views from a third reviewer are obtained. If both reviews are negative, the manuscript is usually rejected or the author(s) is/are asked to re-submit the paper after making substantial improvements.
Fair Review: The editor ensures that each manuscript submitted to the conference is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to nationality, race, religion, gender, etc. of the authors.
Confidentiality: The editor ensures that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editors or reviewers of this conference shall not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without written consent of the author.
Errata Information: The editor must publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
Ethical Guidelines: The editor shall ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
Proof of Misconduct: The editor should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.
Duties of Authors
Publication guidelines: Authors must follow the submission guidelines of the conference.
Original Work: Authors must ensure that what they have written is original. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
Multiple Submissions: Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
Authorship of the Paper: All authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
Data Access and Retention: Authors should provide raw data related to their manuscript for editorial review and must retain such data.
Authenticity of Data: Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
Conflict of Interest: Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
Fundamental Errors: Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes at any point of time if the author(s) discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in submitted manuscript.
Submission Check Form: All authors must complete the author submission check list form.
Research on Human Subjects: When appropriate, all authors must cite approval by an institutional review board (IRB) for research on human subjects.
Duties of Reviewers
Confidentiality: Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research.
Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
Supporting Argument: Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
Plagiarism, Fraud and Other Ethical Concerns: Reviewers should let the editor know if you suspect/find that a manuscript is a substantial copy of another work, citing the previous work in as much detail as possible.
Relevant Work: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should not review 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.
Promptness: In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete the review of the manuscript within the stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.