Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Algebra Combinatorics Discrete Structures and Applications applies a rigorous editorial screening and blind peer-review process to all scholarly manuscripts submitted for publication. The purpose of peer review is to ensure the originality, correctness, relevance, clarity, and scholarly contribution of each manuscript within the journal's aims and scope.

Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first screened by the Editor-in-Chief, a Section Editor, or an assigned member of the editorial team. At this stage, the manuscript is evaluated for its relevance to the journal's scope, originality, scholarly quality, technical soundness, language clarity, completeness of required information, and compliance with the journal's ethical and formatting requirements.

Manuscripts may be rejected at the editorial screening stage without external review if they are outside the scope of the journal, lack sufficient scholarly contribution, fail to meet basic standards of mathematical rigor, contain serious ethical concerns, or do not comply with the journal's submission requirements.

Peer Review Model

The journal uses a blind peer-review process. Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, publication record, independence, and absence of conflicts of interest.

The journal normally seeks at least two independent reviewer reports before a final editorial decision is made. Additional reviewer reports may be requested when the submitted reports are conflicting, incomplete, inconclusive, or when further expert evaluation is necessary.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, constructively, and confidentially. Reviewer reports should address the originality, correctness, mathematical rigor, significance, clarity, organization, adequacy of references, and suitability of the manuscript for publication in the journal.

Reviewers must decline a review invitation if they lack the necessary expertise, cannot complete the review within a reasonable time, or have any conflict of interest that may affect their objectivity. Reviewers must not use, share, distribute, or disclose any unpublished material from a manuscript under review.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than those directly involved in the editorial and peer-review process.

Conflicts of Interest in Peer Review

Editors and reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence, or be perceived to influence, their evaluation of a manuscript. Conflicts may include recent collaboration, institutional affiliation, personal relationships, academic competition, financial interests, or any other circumstance that may compromise impartial judgment.

If a conflict of interest is identified, the editor or reviewer concerned will be replaced or excluded from the decision-making process, as appropriate.

Editorial Decisions

Editorial decisions are based on the reviewers' reports, the editor's own assessment, the manuscript's scholarly merit, its relevance to the journal's scope, and compliance with ethical and publication standards. Possible decisions include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, rejection, or rejection with the possibility of resubmission.

The final decision on a manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief, the handling editor, or the assigned editorial authority. The journal does not guarantee acceptance of a manuscript solely because positive reviewer reports have been received.

Revisions

When revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript together with a clear response explaining how each reviewer and editorial comment has been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed by the handling editor, depending on the nature and extent of the revisions.

Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe that a significant error has occurred during the review or decision-making process. Appeals must be submitted in writing to the editorial office and must provide a clear, reasoned explanation of the grounds for appeal. Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief or by another appropriate member of the editorial team who was not directly involved in the original decision, where possible.

Ethical Concerns During Review

If plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication, citation manipulation, authorship concerns, or other ethical issues are identified during peer review, the journal may suspend the review process while the concern is investigated. The journal may reject the manuscript or take further editorial action in accordance with its publication ethics policies.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently of commercial, institutional, political, or personal influence. Article Processing Charges, where applicable, have no influence on editorial decisions, reviewer selection, peer-review outcomes, or publication decisions.