scholarly journals Preface

2021 ◽  
Vol 1193 (1) ◽  
pp. 011001
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Engineering Society ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Ninth Edition ◽  
Manufacturing Engineering ◽  
The University

As the Chairman of the 9th edition of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference (MESIC 2021) held in Gijόn (Spain) from 23 to 25 of June 2021, I have the honour to present the papers discussed at the conference by researchers and professionals from 18 different countries. This ninth edition was organized by the Manufacturing Engineering Area of the University of Oviedo on behalf of the Manufacturing Engineering Society (SIF). The conference was first held in Calatayud (Spain) in 2005, with the main objective of becoming a forum for the exchange of experiences between national and international researchers and professionals in the field of Manufacturing Engineering. The rest of the editions have been celebrated up to now with this same vocation. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (MSE) publishes here the 140 papers, organised according to the topics of the Conference, that were finally accepted for presentation at the MESIC 2021 after a rigorous peer review process. List of Committees Organizing Committee, Scientific Committee, Editors, Organizer, Promoter and Sponsors and this titles are available in this pdf.

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2022 ◽  
Vol 1217 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Acceptance Rate ◽  
Scientific Committee ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Scientific Standards ◽  
Single Blind

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind The single-blind peer-review method was used for the peer-review process. • Conference submission management system: The papers are emailed to the Secretariat and managed internally. • Number of submissions received: 21 • Number of submissions sent for review: 21 • Number of submissions accepted: 17 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted/Number of Submissions Received × 100): 81% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 26 • Any additional info on review process: List of Secretariat stage, Scientific Committee stage, Adjudicator are available in this pdf.

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2021 ◽  
Vol 1192 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Funding Information ◽  
Scientific Standards ◽  
Single Blind

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind / Double-blind / Triple-blind / Open / Other Double Blind- Remove the author names and affiliations of the authors anywhere in the manuscript. Remove names and affiliations under the title within the manuscript. Do not include or remove any author names or affiliations in the Acknowledgements section of your manuscript. Author names and Funding information should be removed and can be included later in the peer review process. Do not sign your author response, rebuttals, or appeals with author names. Do not include or remove any names in any file names and ensure document properties are also anonymised. Check that your figures and schemes do not include author details. • Conference submission management system: ∘ https://easychair.org/conferences/submissions?a=26389499 • Number of submissions received: 114 (Abstract) • Number of submissions sent for review: 68 • Number of submissions accepted: 59 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 55.6% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 83 • Any additional info on review process: Turnitin was used to check plagiarism. • Contact person for queries: Assoc. Prof. Ir. Dr. Sarina Sulaiman, Department of Biotechnology Engineering, Kulliyyah of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia. Email: [email protected] Assoc. Prof. Dr Noor Noor Illi, Department of Biotechnology Engineering, Kulliyyah of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia. Email: [email protected] Dr Mohd Firdaus Abd Wahab, Department of Biotechnology Engineering, Kulliyyah of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia. Email: [email protected] Prof. Dr. Zahangir Alam, Department of Biotechnology Engineering, Kulliyyah of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia. Email: [email protected]

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2021 ◽  
Vol 1207 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Management System ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Final Manuscript ◽  
Paper Review ◽  
Scientific Standards

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. · Type of peer review: Single-blind · Conference submission management system: SoftConf.com (https://www.softconf.com/l/phm2021) · Number of submissions received: 203 · Number of submissions sent for review: 121 · Number of submissions accepted: 25 · Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted/Number of Submissions Received X 100): 12.3% · Average number of reviews per paper: 2 · Total number of reviewers involved: 46 · Any additional info on review process: Papers out of the scopes of the conference had been rejected in an initial paper screening process. Papers passing the initial screening process had been further evaluated by a group of experts in the field to make sure they meet the necessary standards for acceptance and publication. Each paper underwent formal paper review by at least two reviewers in terms of appropriateness, clarity, originality/Innovativeness, and Overall Recommendation. We used professional conference paper management system “SOFTCONF” in coordinating the paper review process and communicating with the authors. A paper was accepted for presentation and publication only if the comments from both reviewers are positive. The reviewers’ comments had been provided to the authors so that they could follow the suggestions from the reviewers to further improve their papers. The authors were required to highlight the revisions in red in the final manuscript so that the Paper Review Committee could check to ensure the reviewers’ comments were accommodated in the revised manuscript. · Contact person for queries: Jie (Peter) Liu, Professor, Carleton University; Email: [email protected]

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2022 ◽  
Vol 1213 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Acceptance Rate ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Scientific Standards ◽  
Single Blind

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind • Conference submission management system: All the manuscripts received form the authors were sent to the reviewers. Each manuscript was reviewed by one reviewer and re-checked by editor. All comments were sent back to the authors to let them make all corrections. The revised versions of manuscripts were checked and approved by editors. • Number of submissions received: 15 • Number of submissions sent for review: 15 • Number of submissions accepted:11 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted/Number of Submissions Received X 100):73.3 • Average number of reviews per paper: 1 • Total number of reviewers involved:10 • Any additional info on review process: Reviewers considered manuscripts in accordance with: 1) Technical Criteria: scientific rigour, accuracy, correctness of selected methodology. 2) Quality Criteria: originality and novelty, clarity of motivation and results importance. 3) Presentation Criteria: clarity of expression, readability and completeness of presentation, quality of all presented data and figures. • Contact person for queries: Name: Sergey Dubinskiy Email: [email protected]

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2021 ◽  
Vol 1195 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Management System ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Check System ◽  
Scientific Standards ◽  
Single Blind

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind (authors’ identities are known to the reviewers, reviewers’ identities are hidden from authors) • Describe criteria used by Reviewers when accepting/declining papers. Was there the opportunity to resubmit articles after revisions? Reviewers were requested to review the manuscripts by pointing out the strengths, weaknesses, errors, omissions, and inconsistencies in the papers. Authors were encouraged to revise the papers based on the reviewer’s comments. The review process was then repeated until the reviewers were satisfied with the quality of the submissions. • Conference submission management system: Committee-managed system using Google’s suite of products. Submissions were received through Google forms and managed within Google drive. Correspondence with authors was conducted using Gmail. • Number of submissions received: 118 • Number of submissions sent for review: 118 • Number of submissions accepted: 62 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 52.5% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 106 • Any additional info on review process (ie plagiarism check system): Plagiarism was checked using Turnitin, which is embedded in Canvas - Swinburne Sarawak’s course management system. • Contact person for queries: Jaka Sunarso ([email protected])

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2021 ◽  
Vol 1208 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
Management System ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Acceptance Rate ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Scientific Standards

Abstract All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Double-blind • Conference submission management system: Submission of papers and all correspondence between authors, technical secretary, editors, and reviewers were managed with our conference system “Submit System” (http://rim.tfb.ba/submitsystem/login). • Number of submissions received: 94 • Number of submissions sent for review: 89 • Number of submissions accepted: 44 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 46,81% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 to 3 • Total number of reviewers involved: 68 • Any additional info on review process:- • Contact person for queries: Aladin Crnkic, PhD, secretary of RIM 2021 conference; [email protected]; Irfana Ljubijankica bb, 77000 Bihac, Bosnia and Herzegovina

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2021 ◽  
Vol 1209 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
The Status ◽  
Review Form ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Scientific Standards

• All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. Type of peer review: The review process was of an open peer review type. Each article was reviewed by two reviewers. First review was provided by the author, who addressed the reviewer himself and made the revisions in the article before submitting both article and the review form. The first reviewer was asked to be someone close to their research, who could provide helpful advice. Second review was provided mostly by employees of Technical University of Košice. The reviewers reviewed articles close to their research area. They were provided with full articles including the authors names and the authors then received the review form which included the reviewer’s name. The authors had then an opportunity to revise the papers and the papers were accepted only after the authors made the changes asked for by the second reviewer in their articles. In the review form the reviewers were asked to judge the quality of the paper, choosing from options: excellent, good, average, or poor; provide some comments to support their argument and give the authors some notes to help them improve the quality of their paper. For the conclusion of the review form the reviewers had to choose the status of acceptance of the paper, choosing from following options: accepted without revisions, accepted with minor revisions, accepted with major revisions, or rejected. If the paper was accepted without revisions, the authors were then not required to provide any revisions. If the second reviewer decided to choose the reject option, the authors did not have an option to revise their paper and the paper was rejected even if the first reviewer accepted the paper. • Conference submission management system: CaptainForm • Number of submissions received: 88 • Number of submissions sent for review: 88 • Number of submissions accepted: 87 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 98.86 • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 99 • Any additional info on review process: • Contact person for queries: Kamila Kotrasová, [email protected]

scholarly journals The Problem with Peer Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bård Smedsrød ◽  
Erik Lieungh
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Individual Researcher ◽  
Peer Reviewing ◽  
Publishing Houses ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The University ◽  
Insight Into

In this episode professor at UIT - The Arctic University of Norway, Bård Smedsrød, gives us an insight into peer review. How does the system work today, and what's problematic with it? Smedsrød also offers some solutions and encourages Universities to be much more involved in the peer review process. The host of this episode is Erik Lieungh. You can also read Bård's latest paper on peer reviewing: Peer reviewing: a private affair between the individual researcher and the publishing houses, or responsibility of the university? This episode was first published 2 November 2018.

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2022 ◽  
Vol 1212 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Plagiarism Detection ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Minimum Criteria ◽  
Scientific Standards ◽  
Single Blind

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind Each submitted paper reviewed by two minimum of reviewers after meet the minimum criteria. The review based on the following aspects: 1) Technical Criteria (Scientific merit, Clarity of expression, and Sufficient discussion of the context of the work, and suitable referencing); 2) Quality Criteria (Originality, Motivation, Repetition, Length); and 3) presentation criteria (Title, Abstract, Diagram, figures, tables and captions, Text and mathematics, and Conclusion). We also used iThenticate for plagiarism detection. • Conference submission management system: Easychair • Number of submissions received: 125 • Number of submissions sent for review: 117 • Number of submissions accepted: 90 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 90/125 = 72% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 Reviewers • Total number of reviewers involved: 36 • Any additional info on review process: No • Contact person for queries: Name : Dr. Anita Ahmad Kasim Affiliation: Universitas Tadulako, Indonesia Email : [email protected]

scholarly journals Using Wikipedia to teach scholarly peer review

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 178
Author(s):  
Paul Anthony Thomas ◽  
Matthew F Jones ◽  
Spencer G Mattingly
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
University Of Kansas ◽  
Related Literature ◽  
Biology Department ◽  
The World ◽  
The University

This paper outlines a creative Wikipedia-based project developed by the University of Kansas (KU) Libraries and the KU Biology Department. Inspired by the tenets of open pedagogy, the purpose of this project is to use Wikipedia as a way for students to learn about the scholarly peer review process while also producing material that can be shared and used by the world outside the classroom. The paper is divided into three sections, with the first summarizing pertinent related literature related to the paper’s topic. From here, the paper describes the proposed assignment, detailing a process wherein students write new articles for the encyclopedia which are then anonymously peer reviewed by other students in the class; when articles are deemed acceptable, they are published via Wikipedia. The parallels between this project and academic peer review are emphasized throughout. The paper closes by discussing the importance of this project, arguing that it fills a known scholarly need, actively produces knowledge, furthers the aims of the open access movement, and furthers scientific outreach initiatives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document