Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

SmartAI: Buletin artificial intelligence is a scientific journal related to artificial intelligence that contains scientific writings on pure research and applied research in the field of artificial intelligence as well as an overview of the development of theories, methods, and related applied sciences.
Topics cover the following areas (but are not limited to):

  1. Enterprise Systems (ES)
    • Enterprise Resource Planning
    • Business Process Management
    • Customer Relationship Management
    • Marketing Analytics
    • System Dynamics
    • E-business and e-Commerce
    • Marketing Analytics
    • Supply Chain Management and Logistics 
    • Business Analytics and Knowledge Discovery 
    • Production Management 
    • Task Analysis 
    • Process Mining 
    • Discrete Event Simulation 
    • Service Science and Innovation 
    • Innovation in the Digital Economy
  2. Information Systems Management (ISM)
    • Software Engineering
    • Software Design Pattern
    • System Analysis and Design
    • Software Quality Assurance 
    • Green Technology Strategies
    • Strategic Information Systems
    • IT Governance and Audits
    • E-Government 
    • IT Service Management 
    • IT Project Management 
    • Information System Development
    • Research Methods of Information Systems 
    • Adoption and Diffusion of Information Technology
    • Health Information Systems and Technology
    • Accounting Information Systems 
    • Human Behavior in Information System 
    • Social Technical Issues and Social Inclusion 
    • Domestication of Information Technology
    • ICTs and Sustainable Development
    • Information Systems in developing countries 
    • Software metric and cost estimation
    • IT/IS audit 
    • IT Risk and Management
  3. Data Acquisition and Information Dissemination (DAID)
    • Open Data
    • Social Media
    • Knowledge Management 
    • Social Networks
    • Big Data 
    • Web Services 
    • Database Management Systems 
    • Semantic Web and Linked Data 
    • Visualization Information
    • Social Information Systems
    • Social Informatics 
    • Spatial Informatics Systems 
    • Geographical Information Systems
  4. Data Engineering and Business Intelligence (DEBI)
    • Business Intelligence
    • Data Mining
    • Intelligent Systems
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Autonomous Agents
    • Intelligent Agents
    • Multi-Agent Systems 
    • Expert Systems
    • Pattern Recognition
    • Machine Learning
    • Soft Computing 
    • Optimization
    • Forecasting
    • Meta-Heuristics
    • Computational Intelligence
    • Decision Support Systems
  5. IT Infrastructure and Security (ITIS)
    • Information Security and Privacy
    • Digital Forensics
    • Network Security
    • Cryptography
    • Cloud and Virtualization
    • Emerging Technologies
    • Computer Vision and Image
    • Ethics in Information Systems
    • Human-Computer Interaction
    • Wireless Sensor Networks
    • Medical Image Analysis
    • Internet of Things
    • Mobile and Pervasive Computing
    • Real-time Systems and Embedded Systems
    • Parallel and Distributed Systems

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Every script that goes assessed by the following rules:

  • The authenticity of its contribution to the field of scientific publishing, methodological and theoretical reliability is taken in accordance with topics, coherence analysis, grammar, and writing in accordance with existing rules.
  • Each manuscript submitted by the author will do peer review
  • Each article will be reviewed by a minimum of three reviewers.
  • The article will be accepted at least recommended by two reviewers and with permission from the editor.
  • The principle of recruitment of reviewers has at least written scientific journals as the first author, or a member of the author on three pages of articles, both publications of accredited national-scale scientific journals and international-scale scientific journal publications.
  • Any incoming paper will be checked by the section editor, if it does not match the scope of SmartAI, it will be returned for rejection, so if there are things that do not match the regularized style SmartAI, then the paper will be returned to the author if it is appropriate With a regularized style SmartAI, it will be assigned to reviewers.
  • The process of reviewing a paper using a double-blind method involves two reviewers who have been selected by a section editor, if between reviewers there are conflicting decisions, it will be additional reviewers to decide whether the article is accepted or rejected.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The following statements are based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

 

Register: Jurnal Ilmiah Teknologi Sistem Informasi and its Publisher, Department of Information Systems of Faculty of Science and Technology of Universitas Pesantren Tinggi Darul Ulum this journal follows the COPE. Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

SmartAI: Buletin artificial intelligence is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. Authors who submit papers to Register attest that their work is original and unpublished, and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In addition, authors confirm that their paper is their own; that it has not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other works; and that they have disclosed actual or potential conflicts of interest with their work or partial benefits associated with it.

DUTIES OF EDITORS 

Decision on the Publication of Articles 

The Editor in Chief of Register is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The Editor in Chief may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and subjected to such legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor in Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Review of Manuscripts

The Editor in Chief must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor/co-editor, who may make use of appropriate software to examine the originality of the contents of the manuscript and after passing this test, the manuscript is forwarded to two referees for blind peer review and each of whom will make a recommendation to publish the manuscript in its present form or to modify or to reject the same. The time required for each review stage is at least a month after the reviewer states willingness (each article has a different review stage, depending on the quality of the article). If the article is of very good or very poor quality, it is possible to get a decision faster. 

Disclosure and conflicts of interest 

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the manuscript in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author.   

Fair play 

Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.  

Confidentiality 

The Editor in Chief/editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS 

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.  Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method.  In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are asked generally to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.

Promptness 

In case, any reviewer feels that it is not possible for him/her to complete the review of the manuscript within the stipulated time then the same must be communicated to the editor so that the same could be sent to any other reviewer. 

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor.

Some editors encourage discussion with colleagues or co-reviewing exercises, but reviewers should first discuss this with the editor in order to ensure that confidentiality is observed and that participants receive suitable credit.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. 

Alertness to Ethical Issues

A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should bring these to the attention of the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Standards of Objectivity & Competing Interests 

Reviews should be conducted objectively.  Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should consult the Editor before agreeing to review a paper where they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

If a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer’s (or their associates’) work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer’s citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates).  

Acknowledgment of Sources 

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor in Chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS 

Reporting standards 

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. 

Data Access and Retention 

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.    

Originality and Plagiarism 

Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others this must be appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple Publications

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. 

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Department of Information Systems of Faculty of Science and Technology of Universitas Pesantren Tinggi Darul Ulum does not allow any form of plagiarism. Plagiarism is considered to be a serious breach of scientific ethics by the entire scientific community. Incidents of plagiarism in a manuscript or published paper whether detected or reported will be dealt with seriously. We constantly support advice and take suggestions from our Editorial and Reviewer Board on avoiding any malpractice of publication ethics.