Review Workflow

Review Workflow (Steps)

The Journal of Advanced Computer Science (JACS) follows a structured and transparent peer-review workflow to ensure fairness, quality, and timely editorial decisions. All submitted manuscripts undergo several stages before final publication.

Step 1: Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscript through the official online submission system (OJS).

 At submission, authors must provide:

  • manuscript file (Word .docx)

  • full metadata (title, abstract, keywords, authors)

  • supplementary files (optional)

Step 2: Initial Editorial Screening

The Editorial Office performs an initial check to verify:

  • relevance to the journal scope

  • completeness of the manuscript

  • formatting compliance with the template

  • plagiarism/similarity screening

  • language quality and academic writing style

 Outcome:

  • Proceed to review OR

  • Returned for corrections OR

  • Rejected (desk rejection)

Step 3: Assignment to Handling Editor

If the manuscript passes screening, it will be assigned to a Handling Editor who is responsible for:

  • selecting appropriate reviewers

  • supervising review quality

  • ensuring ethical compliance

Step 4: Reviewer Invitation and Confirmation

The Handling Editor invites expert reviewers based on the manuscript topic.

  • Reviewers must accept or decline the invitation

  • Reviewers must declare conflict of interest

  • Reviewers confirm their ability to review within the given deadline

Step 5: Double-Blind Peer Review

JACS applies a Double-Blind Peer Review process.

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

  • originality and novelty

  • technical correctness / methodology

  • strength of results and validation

  • clarity and organization

  • contribution to the field

  • quality of references

Reviewers submit:

  • an evaluation form (scoring)

  • detailed reviewer comments

  • final recommendation

Step 6: Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports, the editor issues one of the following decisions:

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject

The editor may request additional reviews if necessary.

Step 7: Revision by Authors

If revision is required, authors must submit:

  • revised manuscript

  • response letter to reviewers

  • highlighted changes (recommended)

Failure to respond within the deadline may result in rejection.

Step 8: Re-Review (If Needed)

For major revisions, the manuscript may be sent again to reviewers to verify that all comments and required corrections have been properly addressed.

Step 9: Final Acceptance

Once the manuscript satisfies reviewers and editors:

The paper is formally accepted for publication.

Authors may be requested to provide:

  • final formatted version

  • final high-resolution figures

  • ORCID IDs and author details

Step 10: Copyediting and Production

The manuscript enters final processing:

  • language editing (if required)

  • formatting and layout preparation

  • reference checking (IEEE style)

  • proof preparation

Authors receive a proof version to confirm:

  • spelling and formatting

  • author information

  • figure/table placement

Step 11: Online Publication

The final article is published online in the current issue with:

  • DOI (if applicable)

  • full metadata

  • indexing preparation and archiving

Estimated Processing Time

JACS aims to provide the following timelines:

  • Editorial screening: 3–7 days

  • Peer review: 2–6 weeks

  • Final decision: 4–8 weeks (depending on revisions)