Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Introduction:

The "ADBU Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (AJEEE)" - ISSN: 2582-0257, is an International Peer-reviewed Open-Access Online journal in English language exploring innovative research findings in Electrical and Electronics Engineering & Technology and all its allied sciences, published bi-annually by the Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Assam Don Bosco University, Guwahati, India. 

Aim and Scope:

ADBU Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (AJEEE) publishes scientific articles which contribute new novel experimentation and theoretical work in all areas of Electrical and Electronics Engineering and its applications. This Journal will bring together researchers from Academic Institutes, Research organization and Industries, thereby bridging the gap between research and industrial development. Thus, AJEEE contributes to the growth of electrical and electronics engineering science and technology and discusses the recent developments in different areas of this domain of study.  This is an online open access Journal allowing full access to read and download the articles freely.

AJEEE aims at exploring the solutions for all research gaps in electrical and electronics engineering & technology and is trying to enlighten the research area with innovation findings.

 

List of Topics:

Papers are solicited from, but not limited to the following topics:

  • Hybrid Renewable Energy and Energy Saving
  • Controllers, Drives and Machine Design
  • Fuzzy and Hybrid Optimization
  • Power Systems
  • Energy Planning and Policy
  • Power Electronics
  • Electrical Machines
  • Conditional Monitoring and Instrumentation
  • Circuits and Devices
  • Devices and Systems
  • Semiconductors
  • Systems and Control Engineering
  • Power Engineering
  • Communication and Information Processing
  • Electrical Engineering Communications
  • Electromagnetic and Microwave
  • Measurement and Testing
  • Artificial Immune System
  • Nanoscience and Nanotechnology
  • Optics and Optoelectronics
  • Any other topics relevant to the latest trends in Electrical and Electronics Engineering and all its allied sciences

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

What is Peer Review?
Peer review is a process of self-regulation by a profession or a process of evaluation involving qualified individuals within the relevant field. Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards, improve performance and provide credibility. In academia, peer review is often used to determine an academic paper's suitability for publication. In case of blind peer review, the identity of the authors would not be revealed to reviewer/referee till the paper is published in the journal.
 
Why Peer Review?
It is difficult for authors and researchers, whether individually or in a team, to spot every mistake or flaw in a complicated piece of work. This is not necessarily a reflection on those concerned, but because with a new and perhaps eclectic subject, an opportunity for improvement may be more obvious to someone with special expertise or who simply looks at it with a fresh eye through a different angle. By reviewing the research of others, experts can identify the possible weaknesses/flaw, thus quality would be improved.
 
AJEEE, through a double-blind peer-review process, is devoted to publish original and high-quality research / technical papers only.

A manuscript, after its submission, is given to the appropriate editor who chooses referee/referees for the paper.  However, if in the judgment of the editors a paper is unsuitable for the Journal, it will be rejected without external review (although, under such a scenario, authors will have the right to appeal). The journal follows a strict policy for peer review, appointing reviewers (excluding members from the Editorial and Advisory Boards of the journal) who are experts in their respective fields. Generally, two reviewers are assigned to each manuscript. In case of any dispute, the opinion of the third reviewer is sought.


Review Guidelines

If the manuscript is eligible, the Editor will send it to two individual Reviewers along with a “Reviewer’s Evaluation Sheet” - in MS Word 2007 format (https://goo.gl/uGz6fe).

 

Reviewers are asked to evaluate the following:

  • The originality of the work
  • The correctness of the methodology used
  • Adherence to ethical guidelines as per the ADBU journal policies
  • Whether the results have been presented well and support the conclusions
  • Complete and correct referencing
  • Does the article qualify for publication? (Reviewers advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.)

Reviewers do not correct the submissions. They simply add comments in the sections which need corrections.

 

Every Manuscript submitted to AJEEE is subjected rigorous process as follows.

Process Flow:



Step 1: [Author -—› Editor]

Author has to submit his / her manuscript to the Editor through Online Submission.


Step 2: [Editor]
  1. Editor(s) assigns a unique Paper ID to the submitted manuscript. 
  2. Next, Editor(s) determines the quality and originality of the submitted manuscript content by doing Plagiarism check (two times by two independent people). 
  3. Editor(s) gives his / her first opinion on the particular manuscript, whether it is eligible / rejected. 
  • If manuscript is rejected, the Editor regret message to the Author(s). In this case, Author(s) can submit a new article. 
  • If manuscript is eligible, the Editor will send it to two individual Reviewers along with a “Reviewer’s Evaluation Sheet” - in MS Word 2007 format (https://goo.gl/uGz6fe). 
MS Word 2003 version of Reviewer's Evaluation Sheet is also available (https://goo.gl/YYTgbp).


Step 3: [Reviewer -—› Editor]

Reviewer team will evaluate the manuscript and gives the status to the Editor as follows:
  1. Manuscript may be Accepted
  2. Manuscript may be Accepted with minor revision
  3. Manuscript may be Accepted with major revision
  4. Manuscript may be Rejected


Step 4: [Editor -—› Corresponding Author]

Editor sends the evaluation report to the corresponding author through an E-Mail.


Step 5: [The corresponding Author]
 
The corresponding author should take one of the following actions according to the Reviewer’s evaluation report:
 
(i) Accepted: 
(ii) Accepted with revisions (major/minor): 
  • Author does the revision, makes necessary changes in manuscript and re-submit to Editor through E-Mail. 
(iii) Rejected: 
  • Author can submit a new article for forthcoming issues.


Step 6: [Editor -—› Publisher]

Editor performs the final formatting and sends the final manuscripts to Publisher to publish in the current issue.


Step 7: [Publisher]

Publisher publishes the accepted manuscript in the current issue.


Step 8: [Editor -—› Corresponding Author]

Editor gives the publication information to all the corresponding Authors via E-Mail.
 
 
 
 

 

Publication Frequency

The "ADBU Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (AJEEE)" is a bi-annual Journal.

 

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...

 

ADBU Journal Policy Document

Click here to view/download

 

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed 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 behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals.

ADBU Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (AJEEE) is a peer-reviewed journal committed to ensuring the highest standards of publication ethics. All parties involved in the act of publishing (editors, authors, reviewers and the publisher) have to agree upon standards of ethical behavior. We state the following principles of Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors of the Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE (available at http://publicationethics.org/).

We encourage the best standards of publication ethics and take all possible measures against publication malpractices. The Assam Don Bosco University as a publisher, takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.

(1) Duties and responsibilities of editors

The editor of this journal has a complete authority and responsibility to accept or reject a submitted paper and is not influenced by the management or owners in any form. The editor may confer with associate editor, co-editors and peer-reviewers while making a decision.

In addition to many general duties, such as constantly improving the quality and integrity of the journal, striving to needs of authors and readers, encouraging academic debate, and others, the editors accept obligation to apply best will and practice to cope with the following responsibilities:

Editorial Board

Editorial board will be generated from recognized experts in the field. The editor will provide full names and affiliations of the members as well as updated contact information for the editorial office on the journal webpage.

Publication decisions

The editor should be 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 editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Peer review process

All of a journal’s content should be subjected to peer-review. Articles submitted for possible publication are subjected to a double-blind, peer review process. Articles are first reviewed by editors. The editor may reject it out of hand either because it is not dealing with the subject matter for that journal or because it is manifestly of a low quality so that it cannot be considered at all. Articles that are found suitable for review are then sent to two experts in the field of the paper. Referees of a paper are unknown to each other. Referees are asked to classify the paper as publishable immediately, publishable with amendments and improvements, or not publishable. Referees’ evaluations usually include an explicit recommendation of what to do with the manuscript. Referees’ comments are then seen by the author. A detailed process guide is available here.

Editors should be ready to justify any important deviation from the described process. Editors should not reverse decisions on publication unless serious problems are identified.

Editors should publish guidance to all authors and reviewers on everything that is expected of them. This guidance should be regularly updated and will refer or link this code.

Fair play

The editor(s) should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Editors´ decision to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based only on the paper´s importance, originality and clarity, and the study´s relevance to the aim of journal.

Digital Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system (https://www.lockss.org) 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. The editors will ensure digital preservation of access to the journal content by the LOCKSS system by the Standford University. LOCKSS is a general-purpose digital preservation technology and solutions provider and a pillar of Stanford Libraries digital library portfolio.

Confidentiality

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. Editors will ensure that material submitted remains confidential while under review.

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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.

Procedures for dealing with unethical behaviour

Unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone. Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct, should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. AJEEE editors follow the COPE Flowcharts (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts) when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.

The editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, depending on the misconduct seriousness.

Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.


Serious misconduct might require application of one or more following measures:

  • Informing or educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.

  • Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.

  • A formal letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency.

  • Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer's department

  • Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.




(2) Duties and responsibilities 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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication. Authors who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

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/herself 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 authorized 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 an 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

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer´s own research without the written consent of the author. 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.



(3) Duties and responsibilities of authors

Publication and Submission fee

No fees or charges are required from authors for manuscript processing. Authors pay neither submission nor publication fee beyond eventual conference registration fee. Full information about fees must be clearly stated on the journal´s website before authors begin preparing thein manuscript for submission.

Open Access Policy

The journal is freely available online. Authors are required to agree with this open access policy which enables unrestricted access and reuse of all published articles. The articles are published under the Creative Commons copyright license policy CC-BY. Users are allowed to copy and redistribute the material in printed or electronic format and build upon the material, without further permission or fees being required, provided that appropriate credit is given.

Reporting standards

Authors of papers 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. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial "opinion" works should be clearly identified as such.

Peer review

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.

Data access and retention

Authors may be 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: https://www.stm-assoc.org/2006_06_01_STM_ALPSP_Data_Statement.pdf), 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.

Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

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. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

The copyright remains with the authors (CC-BY), thus they can decide about eventual republication of their text. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment 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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

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.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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. Examples of potential conflicts of interest, which should be disclosed, include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible. Readers should be informed about who has funded research and on the role of the funders in the research.

Fundamental errors in published works

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. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.



(4) Duties of the Publisher

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

Access to journal content

The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.

In addition, as the publisher of AJEEE, the Assam Don Bosco University

  • provides practical support to the editor and executive editorial board of AJEEE so that they can follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal;

  • ensures the autonomy of editorial decisions;

  • protects intellectual property and copyright;

  • ensures that good practice is maintained to the standards defined above.