The International Journal of Data Science is committed to maintaining rigorous academic standards through a robust, transparent, and constructive peer-review process. All submitted manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer-review process to ensure impartiality and fairness. The journal’s peer-review process is designed to evaluate the originality, validity, and relevance of submitted research while providing authors with constructive feedback to improve their work.

Submission and Initial Evaluation

Manuscripts must be submitted through the journal’s online submission system, ensuring compliance with the journal’s formatting and ethical guidelines as outlined in the "Author Guidelines." Upon receipt, the editorial office conducts an initial screening to verify that the manuscript fits within the journal’s scope, meets ethical requirements (e.g., plagiarism checks), and adheres to formatting standards. Manuscripts passing this stage are assigned to an editor with subject matter expertise, who determines their suitability for peer review. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable for further consideration are rejected promptly, and authors are notified with reasons for the decision.

Selection of Reviewers

The editor selects at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the manuscript’s field. Reviewers are chosen based on their knowledge, experience, and absence of conflicts of interest. The double-blind review process ensures that both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the process. Invited reviewers receive the manuscript’s abstract and relevant details to assess their suitability and availability. Upon accepting the invitation, reviewers agree to maintain confidentiality and deliver an unbiased assessment within a set timeframe, typically 2 to 4 weeks.

Review Process

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several criteria, including originality, methodology, clarity, relevance, and adherence to ethical standards. Specific evaluation criteria include:

• Originality and novelty of the research.
• Rigor and appropriateness of the methodology, including data collection and analysis.
• Clarity and logical structure of the manuscript.
• Relevance and contribution to the field of data science.
• Ethical compliance, including proper citation and avoidance of plagiarism or data manipulation.

Reviewers provide detailed, constructive feedback and submit their recommendations to the editor. Recommendations may include acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection. Constructive comments are encouraged to help authors improve their work.

Editorial Decision

The handling editor reviews the feedback and recommendations provided by the reviewers. The editor’s decision is informed by the reviewers’ evaluations and may include acceptance, a request for revisions, or rejection. In cases where major revisions are required, authors are invited to address all reviewer comments and resubmit the manuscript with a detailed response. The same reviewers review revised manuscripts or, if necessary, new reviewers.

Final Review and Publication

Once all revisions are completed and approved, the editor conducts a final review to ensure that the manuscript meets the journal’s standards. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting and proofreading to enhance clarity, consistency, and accuracy. The finalized article is published online as an open-access work under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).

Confidentiality and Ethical Standards

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and staff will not share or use any part of the manuscript for personal or professional purposes. Ethical concerns raised during the review process, such as suspected plagiarism or data fabrication, are investigated in accordance with COPE guidelines. If ethical violations are confirmed, appropriate actions are taken, including rejection or retraction.