EDITORIAL POLICY

EDITORIAL HANDLING OF MANUSCRIPTS Every manuscript submitted to RedoXplore undergoes a double-blind peer review, ensuring anonymity for both reviewers and authors. The process includes initial in-house quality checks and scope evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief. The papers are then sent to Editorial Board members for review coordination. The Editor-in-Chief collects external peer review reports, requests author revisions, and conducts additional peer reviews if necessary before deciding on publication or rejection.

Manuscripts should be self-contained and supported by experimental detail. Editorial Board members and other experts peer review the papers. Editors independently decide on acceptance, revision, resubmission, or rejection based on the referees’ reports.

RedoXplore aims for peer review completion within 100 days of submission, working with Section Editors to ensure robust peer review while maintaining fast turnaround times and decisions.

Editorial Process - Roles and Responsibilities The Editor in Chief is responsible for the journal’s scope and represents the title at relevant conferences and meetings. They decide which manuscripts submitted to RedoXplore will be published, guided by the journal’s Editorial Board policies and legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

Section Editors ensure all submissions are within the journal’s scope. They can return unsuitable manuscripts to authors but primarily hand in-scope submissions to Editorial Board members.

Editorial Board members manage the peer review process, working with peer reviewers to obtain independent manuscript assessments and make publication suitability decisions. Revised manuscripts are returned to the original Editorial Board member for reassessment.

Editors must have no conflict of interest with the manuscripts they consider for publication. If an Editor perceives a conflict of interest in their handling of a submission, the selection of reviewers and all manuscript decisions shall be made by the Editorial Board. Editors are responsible for protecting reviewer anonymity.

Editors evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without any bias.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the author’s express written consent.

EDITORIAL PROCEDURES Upon manuscript submission, it undergoes initial quality checks within our editorial office to ensure compliance with the journal’s ethical and publishing guidelines. This includes reviewing relevant metadata, author affiliations, and reference lists. The editor assesses the submission’s suitability for the journal and its scientific validity. The editor can reject the manuscript, request pre-review revisions, or proceed with the peer-review process. If a paper is not ready for peer review, revision suggestions are provided to the author.

Manuscripts passing this initial evaluation are checked for plagiarism using iThenticate. The reports assist the Editor in assessing the manuscript.

Peer Review Process Non-rejected manuscripts undergo peer review, typically by two independent reviewers (Double-blind peer review). The Editor reviews the feedback to ensure relevance and fairness before sharing it with the authors. A decision on the manuscript is made based on this feedback and the Editors’ judgment.

Nominated Reviewers Authors can suggest or oppose reviewers at submission. Suggested reviewers should have no close affiliation with the authors and should provide an objective review. They should not have published with any co-authors in the past three years or currently collaborate with any of the authors’ institutions.

Professional email addresses are preferred over private ones. The Editors reserve the right to select reviewers, which may not include those suggested by authors. The final referee choice rests entirely with the Editor. Authors can specify if they prefer a particular person not to review their manuscript.

Editorial Judgement and Amendments Every article, review, and communication published in the RedoXplore journal undergoes a peer-review process and receives a minimum of two reviews. The editor handling the submission will make one of the following determinations:

Accept: If the submission is approved, it will undergo production procedures for publication in the journal.

Minor Revision: The submission is essentially approved, subject to revision based on the reviewer’s feedback. Authors are required to make minor amendments to their original submission.

Major Revision: The approval of the submission hinges on the proper revision. The author is required to respond to each point or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be amended.

Rejection: The submission has significant shortcomings and/or does not make a unique substantial contribution. No opportunity for resubmission to the journal is offered.

Revised Manuscripts: Manuscripts may be returned to authors for modification of the scientific content and/or for condensation and language corrections. A submission that receives a revised decision also receives the reviewer’s reports, often with Editorial suggestions on how to enhance the work so it can be reconsidered at the journal.

All reviewer comments should be addressed in a point-by-point manner. Where the authors disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear response.

If a paper returned to the authors for revision is not returned to the Editor in the revised form within one month after a Minor revision and two months after a Major revision, the paper will be considered as withdrawn, unless an extension request is made to the Editor handling the paper. Any revised version received after this deadline will be treated as a new, resubmitted manuscript.

Revised manuscripts are returned to an Editor, who, in the case of major revisions, resends the revised paper to the reviewers or, in the case of minor revisions, evaluates the authors’ corrections. The feedback from the second round of reviews follows the described review process. A maximum of two rounds of major revisions per manuscript is typically provided. In exceptional instances, authors may be granted a second opportunity to amend their papers if they are deemed unacceptable even after the initial minor revision. In any case, an Editor has the authority to reject the manuscript if the suggested corrections are not incorporated.

Resubmitted Manuscripts: If a comprehensive revision is required, including a requirement for additional experimental work or analysis, the manuscript may be rejected but with a recommendation to resubmit a substantially revised manuscript. A resubmitted manuscript should be submitted as a new manuscript but should include a letter outlining the amendments that have been made in response to the major criticisms of the original article. The article will be treated as a new submission, it will typically be edited by the Editor who dealt with the original manuscript but may not necessarily be reviewed by the same referees.

Accepted Manuscripts: If the Editor recommends an accept decision, the paper advances to copyediting, proofreading, and typesetting before publication. All authors of the paper are notified of acceptance.

Appeal Procedure for Editorial Decisions: The Editor-in-Chief or Editors will reject papers, with an immediate decision, that are outside the scope of the journal, lack significance or which they believe do not meet the required standards for other reasons. Authors who believe there are substantial grounds for disagreement with an Editor’s decision should contact the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision will be final. Authors who wish to withdraw their manuscript (at any stage of the process) should contact the RedoXplore Editorial office.

Authors have the option to contest a rejection by emailing the Editorial Office of the journal. The appeal must include a comprehensive justification, addressing the reviewers’s comments.

ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE IN PUBLICATION All involved parties, including the author, editor of the RedoXplore, peer reviewer, and publisher, are expected to adhere to the highest standards of publication ethics as established by the Commission on Publication Ethics (COPE). Practices such as data falsification or fabrication, plagiarism, including self-plagiarism without appropriate citation, and misappropriation of work are strictly prohibited. Any instances of ethical misconduct will be taken very seriously and handled following the guidelines set by COPE.

PLAGIARISM Upon manuscript submission to the RedoXplore, it is assumed that the manuscript is original, unpublished, and not being considered for publication elsewhere. Plagiarism is considered as the reuse of text, data, figures, or images without proper acknowledgment or permission, as well as the paraphrasing of text, concepts, and ideas. All plagiarism allegations are thoroughly investigated in line with COPE guidelines.

Please be aware that all submissions undergo a rigorous plagiarism check. All papers submitted will be scrutinized by Similarity Check a Crossref service utilizing iThenticate plagiarism setection software.

Any paper exhibiting clear signs of plagiarism will be outrightly rejected, and the authors will be either permanently or temporarily suspended from publishing in the journal.

COPYRIGHT The submission of a manuscript implies that the work described has not been previously published (except as an abstract, part of a lecture, or thesis) and is not being considered for publication elsewhere.

To reproduce any third-party material, such as tables, figures, or images, in an article, authors must secure permission from the copyright holder and comply with any requirements the copyright holder may have regarding this reuse.

Written proof that such permissions have been obtained from the rights-holder must be provided to the Editors. It is also the author’s responsibility to include acknowledgments as required by the specific institutions.

Clearance for use in both the print and online versions of the journal is particularly important, and we cannot accept permissions that are time-bound because we maintain journal articles as part of our online journal archive.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST The RedoXplore Editorial Board requires a declaration of any conflict of interest upon online submission. If the manuscript is published, conflict of interest information will be communicated in a statement in the published paper.

POLICY ON WITHDRAWAL AND RETRACTION Standards for handling withdrawals or retractions of published papers have been established by various library and scholarly bodies, and RedoXplore has adopted this practice for paper withdrawal or retraction.

In the electronic version of the original paper, a link is provided to the withdrawal (retraction) note where it is clearly stated that the paper has been withdrawn (retracted). The original paper remains unchanged, except for a watermark on the PDF indicating on each page that it is “withdrawn” or “retracted.”