The International Journal of AI and Advanced Engineering expects reviewers to handle every manuscript with professionalism, discretion, and respect. Reviewers are entrusted with unpublished scientific and technical research and should exercise appropriate care when examining, evaluating, and handling materials received during the peer-review process. This responsibility is particularly important for manuscripts involving artificial intelligence systems, machine learning models, engineering designs, algorithms, computational experiments, proprietary technologies, and potentially sensitive technical data.

Confidentiality

Information obtained through peer review must not be discussed outside the review process. Reviewers should take reasonable precautions when accessing, storing, and handling manuscript files, research data, technical documentation, and other confidential materials.

Where manuscripts contain proprietary algorithms, unpublished software, engineering specifications, system architectures, experimental datasets, or information relating to identifiable individuals, organizations, or research projects, reviewers must take particular care to prevent unauthorized disclosure.

Use of Unpublished Information

Reviewers must not use unpublished ideas, findings, algorithms, datasets, software implementations, engineering methods, experimental results, or other information obtained through peer review for their own research, publications, commercial activities, or other purposes without appropriate authorization.

Reviewers must not exploit confidential information obtained during the evaluation process for personal, academic, professional, or commercial advantage before it becomes publicly available.

Reviewer Comments

Review comments should be written in a professional, objective, and respectful manner. Criticism should address the manuscript and its scientific or technical content rather than the author.

Comments should clearly explain the reviewer's concerns and help the editor make an informed decision. Where appropriate, feedback should identify areas in which authors can improve the manuscript's clarity, methodology, technical accuracy, validation, reproducibility, or presentation.

When evaluating research in artificial intelligence and advanced engineering, reviewers should provide constructive feedback on the research methodology, algorithmic design, model performance, experimental setup, engineering feasibility, data quality, evaluation metrics, and interpretation of results, where relevant.

Concerns about dataset suitability, model validation, computational limitations, reproducibility, system reliability, safety, security, or ethical implications should be explained objectively and supported by clear reasoning.

Reviewers should distinguish legitimate scientific or technical criticism from personal preferences or disagreements with an author's approach. Assessments should remain focused on research quality, methodological soundness, technical contribution, reproducibility, and relevant ethical considerations.

Independent Review

Reviewers should prepare their own independent assessment of each manuscript and must not delegate the review to another person without prior permission from the editorial team.

Reviewers should not attempt to influence the editorial process improperly or communicate directly with authors about a manuscript under review unless the editorial team specifically authorizes such communication.

Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest that could affect their impartiality, including personal relationships, professional collaborations, institutional affiliations, competing research interests, commercial interests, or involvement in technologies or products evaluated in the manuscript.

Reviewers should also consider whether their professional or financial interests could compromise an objective assessment of the submitted research.

Handling Review Materials

Review materials must be handled securely and should not be copied, distributed, or retained for purposes unrelated to the review.

After a review assignment has ended, reviewers should follow the journal's instructions regarding access to, storage of, and disposal of review materials, subject to applicable recordkeeping requirements.

Particular care should be taken with confidential datasets, source code, model parameters, unpublished algorithms, engineering drawings, system specifications, experimental records, and other materials that may contain sensitive, proprietary, or restricted information.

Reviewer Conduct Concerns

If a reviewer becomes aware of a concern involving manuscript confidentiality, inappropriate handling of research materials, or possible misconduct during peer review, they should inform the editorial team promptly.

Concerns about reviewer conduct may include unauthorized disclosure of manuscript content, misuse of unpublished research findings, improper use of source code or datasets, undisclosed conflicts of interest, unprofessional review comments, or other conduct that could compromise the fairness, confidentiality, or integrity of the peer-review process.

Concerns about reviewer conduct may be considered under the journal's Complaints and Appeals policy, where appropriate.