Editorial Policy

Collaborate Engineering Daily Book Series is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, independent, confidential, and academically rigorous editorial process for all submitted chapters and thematic volumes. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, originality, methodological quality, technical validity, ethical compliance, relevance to the scope of the series, and suitability for the thematic focus of the intended volume.

1. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently of commercial, financial, institutional, professional, industrial, governmental, or personal interests.

Chapters are assessed according to scholarly quality, originality, engineering relevance, methodological soundness, technical validity, ethical compliance, transparency, and alignment with both the broader scope of the book series and the theme of the relevant volume.

2. Volume Governance and Editorial Responsibility

Individual volumes may be organized around specific engineering themes and may be coordinated by a Volume Editor, Guest Editor, or designated editorial team.

Volume Editors are responsible for maintaining thematic coherence, scholarly quality, reviewer independence, confidentiality, and consistency with the editorial policies of Collaborate Engineering Daily Book Series.

3. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted chapters undergo initial editorial screening before external peer review.

Initial screening may consider:

• Relevance to the scope of the book series;
• Alignment with the thematic focus of the intended volume;
• Originality and significance of the engineering problem;
• Clarity of objectives and scholarly contribution;
• Appropriateness of methods and technical analysis;
• Quality of results, validation, and interpretation;
• Research and publication ethics;
• Quality of English and overall presentation; and
• Compliance with chapter preparation requirements.

Chapters that are clearly outside the scope, lack sufficient scholarly or technical contribution, or do not meet minimum editorial standards may be declined without external peer review.

4. Peer Review Process

Chapters that pass initial editorial screening are subjected to independent scholarly peer review. Reviewers should possess relevant expertise in the engineering or interdisciplinary area addressed by the contribution.

Each chapter is normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, confidential, technically informed, and evidence-based assessments.

Reviewers should evaluate the chapter's originality, methodological quality, technical validity, clarity, contribution, reproducibility where applicable, interpretation of results, use of references, and suitability for inclusion in the intended volume.

5. Editorial Decision-Making

Reviewer recommendations inform but do not automatically determine the final editorial decision. The responsible editor considers reviewer reports together with the quality, originality, engineering relevance, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and thematic suitability of the chapter.

Editorial decisions may include:

• Accept;
• Minor Revision;
• Major Revision;
• Resubmit for Further Review; or
• Decline.

Submission of a revised chapter does not guarantee acceptance. Final inclusion in a published volume remains subject to editorial approval and completion of the production process.

6. Conflicts of Interest

Authors, Volume Editors, reviewers, and other editorial participants must disclose financial, institutional, professional, commercial, or personal relationships that could reasonably influence or appear to influence the preparation, evaluation, or editorial handling of a chapter.

Editors should not handle contributions where a significant conflict exists. Appropriate editorial reassignment should be made when necessary.

7. Research and Publication Integrity

Collaborate Engineering Daily Book Series supports internationally recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing and publication-ethics practices informed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, manipulated peer review, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, data misrepresentation, image manipulation, and undisclosed conflicts of interest are not acceptable.

Concerns regarding possible misconduct will be assessed objectively, confidentially, and proportionately based on available evidence.

8. Originality, Similarity and Prior Publication

Submitted chapters must represent original scholarly work. Chapters should not be simultaneously submitted to another journal, book series, edited volume, or publisher.

Submitted material may be screened using similarity-detection software. Similarity reports are evaluated contextually and are not judged solely on the basis of a numerical percentage.

A chapter derived from a thesis, dissertation, conference paper, technical report, or previous preliminary publication must contain sufficient new scholarly content and should transparently identify the relationship to the earlier work where relevant.

Unattributed copying, inappropriate paraphrasing, redundant publication, or substantial undisclosed reuse of previously published material may result in rejection or appropriate post-publication action.

9. Artificial Intelligence Use

Artificial intelligence systems, generative AI tools, large language models, or autonomous software agents cannot be listed as authors or editors because they cannot assume responsibility for scholarly content, originality, ethical compliance, or accountability.

Substantive use of AI in writing, coding, image analysis, engineering design, simulation, optimization, prediction, classification, data processing, or literature synthesis should be disclosed where relevant.

Editors and reviewers should not upload confidential chapters, unpublished datasets, proprietary designs, reviewer reports, or editorial correspondence to publicly accessible AI systems where confidentiality, intellectual property, privacy, or data security cannot be assured.

10. Engineering Data and Technical Integrity

Engineering contributions should report sufficient technical information to allow readers and reviewers to assess the validity of the methods, assumptions, calculations, experiments, simulations, or engineering decisions presented.

Where relevant, authors should clearly identify geometry, materials, environmental conditions, loading conditions, boundary conditions, equipment specifications, datasets, numerical procedures, experimental settings, validation methods, uncertainty, and applicability limits.

Proprietary engineering information, confidential industrial records, restricted datasets, and commercially sensitive materials should be used only with appropriate authorization.

11. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal when they believe that a significant factual, technical, methodological, procedural, or ethical issue affected an editorial decision.

Appeals should identify the specific issue being challenged and provide a clear scholarly or technical justification.

Complaints concerning editorial conduct, peer review, conflicts of interest, publication ethics, or published content will be considered objectively by an appropriate editorial representative.

12. Corrections, Retractions and Post-Publication Actions

Collaborate Engineering Daily Book Series is committed to preserving the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.

Corrections may be issued when an error affects the accuracy, attribution, interpretation, calculation, figure, reference, metadata, or completeness of a published chapter without invalidating its principal conclusions.

Retractions may be considered where findings are unreliable because of major error, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, unethical research, manipulated data, or other serious integrity concerns.

An Expression of Concern may be issued when significant concerns exist but sufficient information for a definitive editorial action is not yet available.