Peer Review Process

The Journal of Applied Mathematics and Modelling (JAMM) upholds the highest academic and ethical standards by implementing a double-blind peer-review process. This process ensures that all published research meets the criteria of originality, methodological rigor, and scientific significance. Our commitment to fair and thorough evaluation guarantees that only high-quality contributions advance through publication.

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts via JAMM’s online submission system, ensuring compliance with the journal’s formatting and ethical guidelines. Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening to verify its relevance to the journal’s scope, adherence to formatting requirements, and compliance with ethical standards, including plagiarism detection using Turnitin.

2. Preliminary Editorial Review

The Editor-in-Chief and assigned Section Editors conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript meets the fundamental criteria for peer review, including:

  • Alignment with the journal’s scope and contribution to applied mathematics and modeling.
  • Novelty and originality of the research.
  • Clarity of writing and adherence to submission guidelines.
  • Ethical compliance, including plagiarism screening results.

Manuscripts that fail to meet these criteria may be desk rejected at this stage, with constructive feedback provided to the authors.

3. Selection of Peer Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass the preliminary editorial review are assigned to two or more independent expert reviewers specializing in the manuscript’s subject area. Reviewers are selected based on the following:

  • Their expertise in the relevant mathematical field.
  • Their publication and research background in the subject.
  • The absence of any conflicts of interest with the authors.

JAMM maintains a double-blind peer-review policy, meaning that authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the process to ensure an unbiased evaluation.

4. Peer Review and Evaluation

Each reviewer assesses the manuscript based on the following criteria:

✔Originality – Does the research present a novel contribution to applied mathematics and modeling?

✔Scientific Rigor – Is the methodology sound, reproducible, and well-justified?

✔Significance and Impact – Does the study offer meaningful insights or practical applications?

✔Clarity and Organization – Is the manuscript well-structured, coherent, and comprehensible?

✔Ethical Considerations – Does the manuscript adhere to ethical research and publication standards?

Reviewers provide a detailed evaluation report and recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept as submitted (minor or no revisions needed).
  • Accept with minor revisions (small refinements required).
  • Significant revisions are required (substantial improvements are needed before reconsideration).
  • Reject (not suitable for publication).

Reviewers must submit their evaluations within four weeks of receiving the manuscript.

5. Author Revisions and Resubmission

If revisions are requested, authors must:

  • Address each reviewer’s comment point by point in a detailed response letter.
  • Revise the manuscript accordingly and highlight the changes made.
  • Resubmit the revised manuscript within the specified deadline.

For major revisions, the revised manuscript may be re-evaluated by the same reviewers to ensure that all concerns have been addressed satisfactorily.

6. Final Editorial Decision

In consultation with the section editor handling the issue, the editor-in-chief makes the final publication decision based on reviewer feedback and the quality of the revised submission. The possible outcomes include:

  • Accepted for publication – The manuscript is approved for final production.
  • Further revisions are required. Additional minor changes are necessary before acceptance.
  • Rejected – The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards for publication.

7. Copyediting and Proofreading

Accepted manuscripts undergo a professional copyediting and formatting process to ensure the following:

  • Language clarity and grammatical precision.
  • Proper mathematical notation and equation formatting.
  • Adherence to JAMM’s style guidelines.

Authors receive proofs for final approval before publication.

8. Publication

Once finalized, the article will be published in the next available issue of JAMM under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0) license, making it freely accessible to researchers worldwide by the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI). Each article is assigned a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) to ensure permanent accessibility and citation tracking.

9. Post-Publication Discussion and Ethical Compliance

JAMM encourages post-publication discussions through letters to the editor or formal commentary articles. The journal also follows the COPE Core Practices for handling ethical concerns, corrections, and retractions when necessary.

 

Commitment to Excellence in Peer Review

JAMM ensures a transparent, fair, and high-quality peer-review process. By maintaining editorial independence, ethical integrity, and rigorous academic standards, we aim to uphold the credibility and impact of every published article.