Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Process

The Journal of Sustainable Engineering and Intelligent Systems (SEIS) operates a double-blind peer review process. The identities of authors are concealed from reviewers, and the identities of reviewers are concealed from authors, throughout the review process. This is intended to ensure that editorial decisions are based solely on the scientific merit, originality, and quality of the submitted work.

Review Workflow

  1. Submission and Editorial Screening. Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Editor conducts an initial screening to confirm the manuscript falls within the journal’s scope, meets basic formatting and completeness requirements, and passes an originality (similarity) check. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be returned to the author without further review (desk rejection).
  2. Reviewer Assignment. Manuscripts that pass initial screening are anonymized and sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject-matter expertise. Where reviewer recommendations diverge significantly, a third reviewer may be invited.
  3. Review. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript for originality, technical soundness, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope, and provide a written recommendation to the handling editor: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
  4. Editorial Decision. The handling editor considers all reviewer reports and reaches a decision. This decision, along with anonymized reviewer comments, is communicated to the corresponding author.
  5. Revision (if applicable). Authors are given an opportunity to revise their manuscript in response to reviewer comments and resubmit. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for re-evaluation.
  6. Final Decision. Once a manuscript is judged to meet the journal’s standards, a final acceptance decision is issued by the Editor-in-Chief or handling editor.
  7. Copyediting and Production. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, typesetting, and author proofing prior to formal publication.

Review Timelines

SEIS aims to provide authors with a first editorial decision within 4 weeks of submission. Timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity; authors will be kept informed of any significant delay.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on relevant expertise, publication record, and absence of conflict of interest with the submitting author(s). SEIS welcomes suggestions for potential reviewers from authors at the time of submission, though final reviewer selection remains at the discretion of the Editorial Board.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality throughout and after the review process and must not share manuscript content or their review with third parties without the Editor-in-Chief’s permission.