You are: Home » About » Publishing Policy

Publishing Policy

4th International Conference on Computational Methods for Thermal Problems, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, USA, July 6-8, 2016

Statement on Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice

These Ethical Guidelines are based on COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

What is ThermaComp’s position on publishing ethics?

Concurrently with the publication of peer-reviewed journal articles, conference proceedings are indispensable instruments of knowledge transfer and a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors. It is therefore of the utmost importance to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of editing and publishing these conference proceedings. In order to maintain a very high quality, the number of standard presentations has always been limited, and the editors are hoping to maintain such a policy in the future.
We welcome original research on a variety of topics, and are committed to ensuring that advertising, printing or any other commercial activity has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. ThermaComp has no publishing revenue and at all times, authors hold the copyrights of their presentations.

Instructions for Authors

Unless otherwise specified herein, manuscripts should conform to the templates provided on the conference website.
The authors may be asked to provide further information for editorial review; they should be prepared to provide public access to any relevant data, unless its content is restricted, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
The authors should ensure that their work is original, and acknowledge in an appropriate manner any work of other authors, contributors or sources (including online sources), correspondence and discussion with third parties. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Plagiarism constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Multiple, concurrent or redundant manuscript submission for publication constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their conclusion. All sources of financial support should be appropriately disclosed.

Instructions for Editors and Reviewers

Manuscripts will be evaluated for the quality and the originality of their content only, without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The editors' final decision to accept or reject an abstract for publishing is based on the reviewer's comments, and on the relevance of the abstract to the remit of these proceedings.
Reviewers assist the editors in making editorial decisions and may also assist the authors in improving their manuscripts. Reviews should be conducted objectively and personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. The editors, any editorial staff and reviewers must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding authors, reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate. The editors ensure that the peer review process is fair and unbiased, and are ready to respond to any complaint.
Unpublished materials received via a manuscript submission must not be used in an editor's own research or in any editorial staff and reviewers’ own research, without the express written consent of the authors; and any information obtained through peer review must be kept confidential.
Editors should not themselves consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors or institutions connected to them.
Editors should take immediate responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented. If concerns are raised about a possible misconduct, and where applicable, the editors will follow COPE flowcharts and make all reasonable efforts to ensure that the proper enquiries are made.

1. Publication and authorship:
- list of references, financial support;
- no plagiarism, no fraudulent data;
- forbidden to publish same research in more than one journal.

2. Author's responsibilities:
- authors obliged to participate in peer review process;
- all authors have significantly contributed to the research;
- statement that all data in article are real and authentic;
- all authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.

3. Peer review / responsibility for the reviewers:
- Judgments should be objective;
- reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the research funders;
- reviewers should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited;
- reviewed articles should be treated confidentially.

4. Editorial responsibilities:
- e.g. editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article;
- editors should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept;
- only accept a paper when reasonably certain;
- when errors are found, promote publication of correction or retraction;
- preserve anonymity of reviewers.

5. Publishing ethics issues:
- Monitoring/safeguarding publishing ethics by editorial board;
- Guidelines for retracting articles;
- Maintain the integrity of the academic record;
- Preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards;
- Always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed;
- no plagiarism, no fraudulent data.