At Systems and Computing (SyCom), all submissions undergo a rigorous, fair, and timely peer-review process designed to ensure scientific quality, integrity, and transparency. The journal is committed to the dissemination of high-quality research and to providing constructive scholarly feedback to authors.

1. Submission
   Authors must follow the journal’s submission guidelines to ensure proper formatting and completeness. Submissions sent by email are not accepted. Submission of a manuscript implies consent to the collection and processing of personal data in accordance with the journal’s Privacy Statement. All manuscripts must be submitted through the online system via the “Make a Submission” link. 

2. Initial Editorial Screening (within 7 days)

   All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial screening conducted by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor. This stage ensures that the manuscript meets the journal’s minimum requirements in terms of scope, formatting, ethical standards, and scientific quality.

   During this process, the manuscript is evaluated for:

   • compliance with the journal’s aims, scope, and submission guidelines,
   • formatting and administrative requirements,
   • originality using plagiarism detection software (Turnitin),
   • basic scientific quality, including originality, clarity, methodological soundness, and relevance.

   Manuscripts with a high similarity index (above 25%, excluding references and properly cited text), evidence of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or duplicate submission, or those that fall outside the journal’s scope or fail to meet minimum scientific standards may be rejected at this stage without external peer review.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review (First round: 4–6 weeks)

   SyCom applies a double-blind peer-review process in which both author and reviewer identities remain confidential.

   The journal does not permit the use of author-suggested (recommended) reviewers at any stage of the submission process. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field. In cases of conflicting opinions or specialized requirements, a third reviewer may be consulted.

   Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

   • originality and contribution to the field,
   • scientific and methodological rigor,
   • clarity of presentation and organization,
   • relevance to the journal’s scope.

   Reviewers are expected to provide detailed and constructive feedback. Authors must submit a structured, point-by-point response to all reviewer comments when revising their manuscript.

   Editors and reviewers are required to declare any conflicts of interest and must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where such conflicts exist.

4. Editorial Decision and Revision (within 2-4 weeks)
   Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editorial team makes one of the following decisions: acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. Authors are expected to submit revised manuscripts within 2–4 weeks, depending on the extent of the requested revisions. Revised submissions may be subject to further review.

5. Final Acceptance and Publication

   Accepted manuscripts undergo professional copyediting and formatting to ensure clarity, consistency, and adherence to the journal’s standards.

   After acceptance, authors will receive page proofs for final review and approval. Only minor corrections (typographical or formatting errors) are permitted at this stage.

   Once finalized, articles are assigned a DOI through CrossRef and published as part of the designated issue.

   All published articles are made freely accessible under the journal’s Open Access policy, ensuring broad dissemination of research findings. The journal ensures long-term digital preservation of its content through the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN), guaranteeing secure and permanent archiving of all published articles.