Focus and Scope
The JITeCS (Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science) is a peer-reviewed open access journal published by Faculty of Computer Science, University of Brawijaya (UB), Indonesia. The journal is an archival journal serving the scientist and engineer involved in all aspects of information technology computer science, computer engineering, Information Systems, Software Engineering and Education of Information Technology. JITeCS publishes original research finding and high quality scientific articles that present cutting-edge approaches including methods, techniques, tools, implementations and applications.
The JITeCS papers are solicited from, but not limited to the following topics: Computer Network and Architecture, Data Mining, Embedded Systems, Fuzzy Logics, Genetic Algorithms, Geographic Information System, Human Computer Interaction, Image Processing, Internet of Things (IoT), Computer Vision, Information Security, Modeling System and Control, Mobile Technology, Neural Networks, Remote Sensing, Robotics, Signal Processing and Software Engineering.
The journal offers papers dealing with computer application in Smart Systems (smart city, intelligent transportation systems, smart home, smart sensor networks), E-Government, E-Learning, E-Commerce and Environmental Systems (carbon footprints, climate and ecosystem monitoring, environmental management systems, disaster management).
Peer Review Process
We are committed to prompt evaluation and publication of fully accepted papers in JITeCS (Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science). To maintain a high-quality publication, all submissions undergo a rigorous review process. Characteristics of the peer review process are as follows:
- Simultaneous submissions of the same manuscript to different journals will not be tolerated.
- Manuscripts with contents outside the scope will not be considered for review.
- Papers will be refereed by reviewers and editorial board.
- In addition, Editors will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed. Authors will be informed when Editors decide further review is required.
- All publication decisions are made by the journal's Editors-in-Chief on the basis of the referees' reports. Authors of papers that are not accepted are notified promptly.
- All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. We expect our Board of Reviewing Editors and reviewers to treat manuscripts as confidential material as well.
- Editors and reviewers involved in the review process should disclose conflicts of interest resulting from direct competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, and remove oneself from cases in which such conflicts preclude an objective evaluation. Privileged information or ideas that are obtained through peer review must not be used for competitive gain.
- In the reviewing process, there are at least two reviewers for each manuscript in the related topic. In case of three reviewers, decision will be made from at least two reviewers.Â
- All reviewing process are inÂ double blind peer review.Â This means that the reviewers of the paper wonâ€™t get to know the identity of the author(s), and the author(s) wonâ€™t get to know the identity of the reviewer.
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
Publication Ethics and Malpractices
STATEMENT ON PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE
JITeCS (Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science) is a double blind peer-reviewed journal. This statement spells out ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article for this journal, i.e., the author, the editors, the peer-reviewers, and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
DUTIES OF EDITORS
Decision on the Publication of Articles
The Editor- in - Chief and Managing Editor of Indian Journal of Computer Science are responsible for deciding which of the articles accepted for publication after undergoing double blind peer review should be published. The Editor- in - Chief and the Managing Editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's Editorial Board and subjected to such legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. However, neither the Editor- in- Chief nor the Managing Editor have the authority to influence the reviewers who are conducting the blind review of the articles submitted for peer review.
Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
The Editor- in - Chief, the Managing Editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the manuscript (while handling it) in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Contribution of Double Blind Peer Review
Double Blind Peer review assists the reviewers in making editorial decisions, while editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. The reviewers don't know the author's identity, as any identifying information will be stripped from the document before review. Reviewers' comments to the editors are confidential and before passing on to the author will be made anonymous. The names of the reviewers remain strictly confidential; with their identities known only the Editor-in-Chief and the Managing Editor.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the Editor- in - Chief and the Managing Editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to, or discussed with, others except as authorized by the Editor- in - Chief and the Managing Editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor- in- Chief/Managing Editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through double blind peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Conflict 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.
DUTIES OF AUTHORSReporting Standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such, if practicable, and should in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must be appropriately cited or quoted.
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The Corresponding Author
The Corresponding Author is the author responsible for communicating with the journal for publication. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Acknowledgment of Funding Sources
Sources of funding for the research reported in the article should be duly acknowledged at the end of the article.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the Editor - in - Chief/Managing Editor and cooperate with the editors to retract or correct the paper.