Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Indonesian Journal of Computing and Cybernetics Systems (IJCCS), a two times annually provides a forum for the full range of scholarly study . IJCCS focuses on advanced computational intelligence, including the synergetic integration of neural networks, fuzzy logic and eveolutionary computation, so that more intelligent system can be built to industrial applications. The topics include but not limited to : fuzzy logic, neural network, genetic algorithm and evolutionary computation, hybrid systems, adaptation and learning systems, distributed intelligence systems, network systems, human interface, biologically inspired evolutionary system, artificial life and industrial applications. The paper published in this journal implies that the work described has not been, and will not be published elsewhere, except in abstract, as part of a lecture, review or academic thesis.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Editors
  • Paholo Prakoso
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Every article that goes to the editorial staff will be selected through Initial Review processes by Editorial Board. Then, the articles will be sent to the Mitra Bebestari/ peer reviewer and will go to the next selection by Blind Review Process. After that, the articles will be returned to the authors to revise. These processes take a month for a maximum time. In the each manuscript, Mitra Bebestari/ peer reviewer will be rated from the substantial and technical aspects. Mitra Bebestari/ peer reviewer that collaboration with IJCCS is the experts in the public administration area and issues around it. They were experienced in the prestigious journal management and publication that was spread around the national and abroad.

All submitted manuscripts are read by editorial staff. Those Manuscript evaluated by editors to be inappropiate to journal criteria are rejected promptly without external review. Manuscript evaluated to be of potential interest to our readership are sent to double bilnd reviewers. The editors then make a decision based on the reviewer's recommendation from among several possibilities : rejected, revision required, or accepted.

The editor has the right to decide which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published.

Review Process :

  1. Author submit the manuscript
  2. Editor Evaluation (some manuscript are rejected or returned before the review process)
  3. Bind peer review process
  4. Editor Decision
  5. Confirmation to the author

 

Publication Frequency

IJCCS is published four times annually, January, April, July and October by the Indonesian Computer, Electronics and Instrumentation Support Society (IndoCEISS) in colaboration with Department Computer Science and Electronics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta.

 

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.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Ethics & Malpractice Statement

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

 

Indonesian Journal of Computing and Cybernetics System (IJCCS) is a peer-reviewed electronic journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher (IndoCEISS). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

 

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

 

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed IJCCS journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is, therefore, important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.  

 

IndoCEISS as publisher of Indonesian Journal of Computing and Cybernetics System takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously, and we recognise our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. Also, the Department Computer Science and Electrnics of Universitas Gadjah Mada and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

 

Publication decisions

 

The editor of the Indonesian Journal of Computing and Cybernetics System is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

 

Fair play

 

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

 

Confidentiality

 

The editor 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, as appropriate.

 

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

 

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

 

Duties of Editor

 

The editor responsible for receiving submissions should be sent by the authors. In the process of editing the manuscript, the editor in conducting the assessment must still prioritize the weight of scientific articles were examined, with prejudice to race, gender, ethnicity, religion, nationality and political views of the writer. The editors are not allowed to conceal information about the article in question, except to the authors, bebestari partners and publishers. If the manuscripts are accepted less worthy of publication, the editors must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript, so as not to be used by others, except by permission of the authors.

 

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.

 

Promptness 

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 excuse himself from the review process.

 

Confidentiality 

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

 

Standards of Objectivity 

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

 

Acknowledgement of Sources 

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

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest 

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

 

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 behaviour and are unacceptable.

 

Data Access and Retention 

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

 

Originality and Plagiarism 

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

 

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication 

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 behaviour and is unacceptable.

 

Acknowledgement of Sources 

Proper acknowledgement 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. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

 

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects 

If the work involves chemicals, human, animals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

 

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 work 

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.

 

Screening Plagiarism

The manuscript that submitted into this journal will be screened for plagiarism using:

1.Plagiarism checkerX.

2.Turnitin.

 

Digital Archiving

This journal utilizes the Indonesia One Search (IOS) and Indonesian Publication Index (IPI) system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration.

 

Statistic Download Article

Statistic download using ALM Plugin, statistic will show on every article page. ex. https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/ijccs/article/view/7540

 

Reviewers' Guidelines

Review Process of Manuscript: Initial Review

  1. Read the abstract to be sure that you have the expertise to review the article. Don’t be afraid to say no to reviewing an article if there is the good reason.
  2. Read information provided by the journal for reviewers so you will know: a) The type of manuscript (e.g., a review article, technical note, original research) and the journal’s expectations/parameters for that type of manuscript.; b) Other journal requirements that the manuscript must meet (e.g., length, citation style).
  3. Know the journal’s scope and mission to make sure that the topic of the paper fits in the scope.
  4. Ready? Read through entire manuscript initially to see if the paper is worth publishing- only make a few notes about major problems if such exist: a) Is the question of interest sound and significant?; b) Was the design and/or method used adequately or fatally flawed? (for original research papers); c) Were the results substantial enough to consider publishable (or were only two or so variables presented or resulted so flawed as to render the paper unpublishable)?
  5. What is your initial impression? If the paper is: a) Acceptable with only minor comments/questions: solid, interesting, and new; sound methodology used; results were well presented; discussion well formulated with Interpretations based on sound science reasoning, etc., with only minor comments/questions, move directly to writing up review; b) Fatally flawed so you will have to reject it: move directly to writing up review; c) A mixture somewhere in the range of “revise and resubmit” to “accepted with major changes” or you’re unsure if it should be rejected yet or not: It may be a worthy paper, but there are major concerns that would need to be addressed.
  6. Please upload files after review for the editor and/or author to consult.

 Full Review Process of Manuscript

  1. Writing: Is the manuscript easy to follow, that is, has a logical progression and evident organisation?
  2. Is the manuscript concise and understandable? Any parts that should be reduced,
  3. Eliminated/expanded/added?
  4. Note if there are major problems with mechanics: grammar, punctuation, spelling. (If there are just a few places that aren’t worded well or correctly, make a note to tell the author the specific places. If there are consistent problems throughout, only select an example or two if need be- don’t try and edit the whole thing).
  5. Abbreviations: Used judiciously and are composed such that reader won’t have trouble remembering what an abbreviation represents.
  6. Follows style, format and other rules of the journal.
  7. Citations are provided when providing evidence-based information from outside sources.


Please download this link: https://simpan.ugm.ac.id/s/AkocwZqGpdqG75R for Review Guidelines in Bahasa Version

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------