Publication ethics

Peer review

Every submission is peer-reviewed by members of the scientific committee, and every author receives the decision by e-mail as soon as the review is complete.

Quality criteria: Science in Quality

ICMECE 2027 papers are reviewed according to the Science in Quality criteria: seven integrity gates and twenty criteria for scientific quality and presentation. Science in Quality is a set of criteria, a scoring method and a review procedure that describes what a sound, well-reported scientific paper looks like, from research integrity to presentation. It is not an institution, an index or a publisher.

Seven gatekeeping requirements are pass or fail. Ten scientific quality criteria and ten presentation criteria then decide how strong the paper is: whether it adds reliable new knowledge, and whether readers and reviewers can understand, check and cite it. The criteria build on established standards of research integrity and reporting:

• COPE publication ethics
• ICMJE authorship
• CRediT contributor roles
• EQUATOR reporting guidelines
• FAIR data principles

Seven gates: pass or fail

A paper that does not pass a gate is not accepted, whatever its scientific merit.

1. G1

   Originality

   Similarity at or below the limit (20% overall, 5% from any single source, references excluded); no duplicate or redundant publication.

   Evidence similarity report (e.g. iThenticate)

2. G2

   Research ethics

   Ethics committee approval for studies on humans or animals; informed consent where people take part.

   Evidence approval number and committee name

3. G3

   Data and image integrity

   No fabrication, falsification or inappropriate image manipulation; raw data available on request.

   Evidence signed integrity declaration

4. G4

   Authorship

   Every author meets the ICMJE criteria; no guest or ghost authors.

   Evidence CRediT contribution statement; ORCID iDs

5. G5

   Conflicts of interest and funding

   All financial and personal interests and all funding sources declared.

   Evidence declaration section in the paper

6. G6

   Use of generative AI

   Any AI use in writing, analysis or images is disclosed; AI is never listed as an author; authors take full responsibility.

   Evidence AI-use statement

7. G7

   Citation integrity

   No citation manipulation or coerced citations; self-citation limited to what the work needs.

   Evidence reference list, checked by the reviewer

Ten criteria for scientific quality

S1Originality and significance

New knowledge, a new method or new data; the research gap and the paper’s contribution are stated explicitly.

S2Research question and objectives

A clear, specific and answerable question; hypotheses where the design calls for them.

S3Literature review

Current, relevant and critical coverage of the field; the work is positioned against the state of the art.

S4Methodology

A design suited to the question, with enough detail to repeat it: materials, equipment, parameters, software and versions, controls or baselines.

S5Data analysis and statistics

Correct methods with their assumptions checked; uncertainty reported (error bars, confidence intervals, error analysis); comparison with benchmarks.

S6Reproducibility and data availability

A data and code availability statement; data shared in a repository where possible, following the FAIR principles.

S7Results

Complete, clearly presented and consistent with the methods, including negative or unexpected results.

S8Discussion

Results interpreted against prior work, with mechanisms explained; no claims beyond the evidence.

S9Limitations

Limitations stated honestly, with their effect on the conclusions.

S10Conclusions and impact

Conclusions follow from the results; theoretical or practical implications and future work are named.

Ten criteria for presentation

P1Title

Accurate and specific, without exaggeration.

P2Abstract

Background, aim, method, key results with numbers and the conclusion, within the word limit.

P3Keywords

3–6 terms that a researcher in the field would search for.

P4Structure

IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion) or the field’s accepted equivalent.

P5Language

Clear, concise and grammatical English; terms and abbreviations defined at first use.

P6Figures and tables

Legible, axes labelled with units, self-explanatory captions, at least 300 dpi; each one cited in the text.

P7Equations, units and notation

SI units, consistent symbols, a nomenclature list where many symbols are used.

P8References

Complete and accurate, one consistent style, primary and recent sources, DOIs where they exist.

P9Reporting guidelines

The checklist that fits the study type is followed (e.g. CONSORT for trials, PRISMA for systematic reviews, ARRIVE for animal studies, STROBE for observational studies).

P10Metadata and declarations

Author names, affiliations and ORCID iDs; corresponding author; funding, acknowledgements and data statements in place.

In the full Science in Quality model, at least two reviewers score each of the twenty criteria from 0 (absent) to 4 (excellent); scientific quality counts 70% and presentation 30% of a total out of 100. The ICMECE 2027 review uses the seven gates and the twenty criteria; it does not award Science in Quality levels. Science in Quality is a set of criteria, not an index, an accreditation or a publisher.

Originality

Submit original work that is not published or under review elsewhere. Papers with substantial unattributed overlap with published work, including the authors' own, are rejected. Extended versions for partner journals add at least 40% new content, and each journal applies its own checks.

Generative AI

AI tools cannot be authors. Describe any use beyond language editing (the tool, its version and what it was used for) in the acknowledgment section of the paper. Authors are responsible for every statement, figure and reference in their paper. Reviewers do not upload submissions to public AI tools.

Authorship

Everyone listed as an author has contributed to the work and agrees to the submission. Changes to the author list after acceptance need the written agreement of all authors. At least one author registers for each paper and presents it, in person or online.

Misconduct

Plagiarism, fabricated or falsified data and duplicate submission lead to rejection, or to removal from the proceedings after publication. Report a concern to icmece.conference@gmail.com; reports are handled confidentially.

Conflicts of interest

Some of our partner journals are edited by members of the ICMECE organizing committee; papers are handled under each journal's own editorial policy. Each journal decides independently; an invitation is not an acceptance. Reviewers with a conflict of interest, such as co-authors or colleagues at the same institution, do not review the paper. Journal recommendations are made by the scientific committee after the conference, and an invited author can always decline.

ICMECE is organized by VintEight Conference Organization, a private organizer in Ankara; registration fees pay for the conference.

Last updated: October 2026.