Peer Review Process | International journal of applied mathematics

Peer Review Process

International Journal of Applied Mathematics (IJAM)

The International Journal of Applied Mathematics (IJAM) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic excellence, transparency, and research integrity. To ensure the publication of high-quality scholarly work, IJAM follows a rigorous double-blinded peer review process, where the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review procedure.

Overview of the Double-Blinded Peer Review

The double-blinded peer review system is designed to ensure fairness, impartiality, and objective evaluation of submitted manuscripts. Neither authors nor reviewers are informed of each other’s identities, minimizing bias and maintaining the integrity of the review process.

Manuscript Submission

Authors must submit manuscripts electronically through the journal’s official submission system or designated editorial email.

During submission, authors must confirm that:

The manuscript is original and unpublished work;
The manuscript is not under consideration by another journal;
All authors have approved the submission;
Ethical publishing standards have been followed.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, the Editorial Office conducts a preliminary screening to verify compliance with:

The journal’s aims and scope;
Manuscript formatting and submission requirements;
Academic quality and relevance;
Ethical publishing standards and plagiarism policies.

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned for correction or rejected without external review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor for further evaluation.

Assignment of Reviewers

The handling editor assigns the manuscript to at least two independent expert reviewers with appropriate expertise in applied mathematics or related disciplines.

Reviewers are selected based on:

Academic qualifications and research expertise;
Publication record in the relevant subject area;
Experience in peer reviewing scholarly manuscripts;
Absence of any actual or potential conflicts of interest.

Double-Blinded Review Process

The peer review process is strictly double-blinded:

Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors;
Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

Originality and scientific contribution;
Relevance to applied mathematics and interdisciplinary applications;
Mathematical accuracy and methodological rigor;
Clarity of presentation and logical organization;
Validity of results and conclusions;
Proper citation of literature and ethical compliance.

Reviewers provide:

Constructive comments and recommendations for improvement;
A recommendation of:

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject

Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor carefully evaluates the reviewers’ reports and makes an editorial decision.

Authors receive:

An official editorial decision letter;
Anonymous reviewer comments;
Guidance for revisions, where applicable.

Revision and Resubmission

If revisions are requested:

Authors must submit a revised manuscript within the specified timeframe;
A detailed response letter addressing each reviewer comment must accompany the revised submission.

Depending on the extent of revisions, revised manuscripts may be:

Sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation; or
Assessed directly by the handling editor.

Final Decision

The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is made by the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor after careful evaluation of the revised manuscript and reviewer feedback.

Accepted manuscripts proceed to: