Peer Review Policy

International Journal of Intelligent Data and Machine Learning (IJIDML)

The International Journal of Intelligent Data and Machine Learning (IJIDML) is committed to upholding the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process. Peer review ensures the validity, originality, and quality of research published in the journal.

1. Type of Peer Review

• IJIDML employs a double-blind peer review process, where:

  • Authors’ identities are concealed from reviewers

  • Reviewers’ identities are concealed from authors

• This ensures unbiased and objective evaluation of manuscripts.

2. Editorial Screening

All submissions undergo an initial editorial review to check:

• Relevance to the journal’s scope

• Originality and novelty of research

• Compliance with submission guidelines

• Ethical considerations and plagiarism checks

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without external review.

3. Reviewer Selection

• Reviewers are chosen based on expertise in the subject area

• Potential conflicts of interest are considered; reviewers must disclose any conflicts

• The journal maintains a diverse pool of qualified reviewers from academia and industry

4. Review Process

• Each manuscript is generally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers

• Reviewers assess manuscripts on:

  • Originality and contribution to the field

  • Technical and methodological rigor

  • Clarity, presentation, and reproducibility of results

  • Relevance to intelligent data analytics and machine learning

• Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommendations for editorial decisions

5. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports, the Editor-in-Chief or handling editor may decide to:

• Accept the manuscript

• Accept with minor revisions

• Request major revisions and resubmission

• Reject the manuscript

The final decision is made by the editorial board, independent of authors’ ability to pay fees.

6. Revision and Re-Review

• Authors must respond to reviewer comments clearly and respectfully

• Revised manuscripts may be returned to original reviewers for further evaluation

• Failure to adequately address reviewer concerns may lead to rejection

7. Confidentiality

• Manuscripts and reviews are confidential

• Reviewers must not share or use manuscript content for personal or professional gain

8. Conflicts of Interest

• Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts and decline the review if impartiality is compromised

• Editors recuse themselves from handling manuscripts with conflicts of interest

9. Ethical Oversight

• The journal follows COPE guidelines for ethical publishing

• Any issues regarding misconduct, bias, or unethical behavior are investigated promptly

10. Appeals and Complaints

• Authors may appeal editorial decisions with a justified request to the editorial office

• Complaints regarding peer review are handled fairly and transparently