Decision-Making Process

Turing Ledger Journal of Engineering & Technology (TLJET)

TLJET upholds a transparent, impartial, and rigorous editorial workflow to ensure the publication of impactful and ethically sound research in engineering, computer science, and applied technology. Each manuscript is evaluated for originality, technical accuracy, relevance, and compliance with scholarly standards.

1. Initial Submission Screening

Preliminary Editorial Review

Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an internal check by the editorial office to verify:

  • Formatting compliance (title, abstract, keywords, references, etc.)

  • Adherence to TLJET’s plagiarism policy (<10% similarity preferred)

  • Completion of:

    • Author and affiliation details

    • Conflict of interest declarations

    • Funding disclosures

    • Copyright/license agreements

Scope and Relevance Check

The Editor-in-Chief or a Section Editor assesses whether the submission fits TLJET’s scope, including:

  • Electrical, Mechanical, Civil, and Software Engineering

  • Artificial Intelligence, Data Science, Robotics, IoT, and Emerging Technologies

Submissions outside the scope or failing to contribute original knowledge may be desk-rejected without peer review.

2. Peer Review Process

Reviewer Assignment

Submissions that pass initial screening are forwarded for double-blind peer review. At least two independent reviewers with relevant domain expertise are invited to assess the manuscript.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess the manuscript based on:

  • Originality and novelty of the engineering/technical approach

  • Robustness of methodology, design, and experimentation

  • Data analysis, simulation integrity, or empirical validation

  • Relevance to real-world applications or theoretical advancement

  • Clarity, structure, and coherence of the manuscript

  • Compliance with relevant guidelines (e.g., IEEE, ISO, ACM, PRISMA-ScR for systematic reviews)

Reviewer Recommendations

Each reviewer recommends one of the following outcomes:
✅ Accept as is
✏️ Minor revisions
???? Major revisions with resubmission
❌ Reject

3. Editorial Evaluation and Final Decision

Review Synthesis

The handling editor consolidates reviewer comments and determines consensus. In case of conflicting reviews or borderline decisions, a third reviewer or editorial consultation may be initiated.

Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief, guided by reviewer feedback and internal evaluation, makes the final decision:

  • Accept

  • Minor Revision Required

  • Major Revision Required

  • Reject

A formal decision letter is sent to the corresponding author along with anonymized reviewer reports and clear revision instructions (if applicable).

4. Revisions and Resubmission

Minor Revisions

Authors typically receive 2–3 weeks to address feedback. The revised manuscript is reviewed by the handling editor for compliance.

Major Revisions

For substantial changes, authors are given 4–6 weeks to resubmit. The revised manuscript may be:

  • Returned to original reviewers

  • Re-evaluated internally

Resubmission After Rejection

Rejected manuscripts may only be resubmitted as new submissions if:

  • Substantial improvements are made

  • An invitation or approval is received from the editorial office

5. Communication and Appeals

Decision Notification

Authors receive:

  • Editorial decision

  • Consolidated reviewer feedback

  • Post-acceptance instructions (for accepted papers)

Appeals

Authors may submit a formal appeal with justification if they believe a decision was made in error. Appeals are reviewed by:

  • Editor-in-Chief

  • Optionally, a neutral third-party reviewer

Decisions on appeals are final and non-negotiable.

6. Post-Acceptance Workflow

Final Submission

Accepted manuscripts must include:

  • Final revised manuscript (Word + PDF)

  • Author bios and ORCID iDs

  • Copyright/license agreement

  • High-resolution figures/diagrams (in editable format if possible)

Copyediting and Proofs

Manuscripts are:

  • Copyedited for grammar, consistency, and clarity

  • Returned to authors for final proof approval before publication

Online Publication

Articles are published in the next scheduled issue and made immediately open access under
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 License.

7. Ethical Oversight

Conflict of Interest

All authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose:

  • Financial, institutional, or personal conflicts that could influence the review or publication process

Research Integrity and Ethics

Submissions involving:

  • Simulations, software testing, experiments, or data analysis must include sufficient technical details and transparency.

  • Human-subject data (if any) must have IRB/ethical clearance.

TLJET reserves the right to investigate and retract publications that violate ethical or scientific standards.

Conclusion

This decision-making framework reflects TLJET’s commitment to:

  • Scholarly integrity

  • Technical rigor

  • Transparency and fairness

By maintaining a robust editorial process, TLJET ensures that each published article contributes meaningfully to the global engineering and technology community.