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.

13. Electronic Filing and Digital Archiving

Collaborate Engineering Daily Book Series recognizes the importance of long-term access, reliable digital records, and preservation of the scholarly record. The Editorial Office should maintain electronic copies of published volumes and chapters, bibliographic metadata, and associated editorial notices in its publication system, with suitable backup and restoration practices.

Published records should identify the version of record and, when applicable, include persistent identifiers such as DOIs. Corrections, retractions, and other notices should be linked to the affected chapter. Any arrangements with external archiving or preservation services will be identified publicly once established; no particular third-party archival service is claimed by this policy.

14. Copyright Policy

Authors and contributors must hold the necessary rights to their original work and obtain permission to reproduce copyrighted figures, diagrams, photographs, tables, standards, or other third-party materials. Authorship, copyright ownership, and publishing rights must be clearly identified in the publication agreement and/or the copyright statement accompanying each chapter.

Reuse of content must respect the copyright notice, the applicable open-access license, and any third-party material exceptions. This section provides the Copyright Policy anchor for the website; the actual published page URL can be used as the Copyright URL in external forms.

15. License Policy

The license governing the distribution, sharing, adaptation, and reuse of each open-access chapter must be stated clearly on the chapter or volume publication page, together with an accessible link to the full license terms. Open access to read a publication does not, by itself, authorize unrestricted reuse.

Readers and authors must follow the conditions of the specific license assigned to the publication and any separately credited third-party materials. The official license here.

16. Plagiarism Policy

Plagiarism includes presenting another person's text, ideas, findings, methods, data, images, engineering drawings, or software outputs without appropriate acknowledgment. Undisclosed substantial text recycling, inappropriate paraphrasing, and duplicate publication may also breach this policy.

Submissions may be evaluated with similarity-detection tools and manual editorial assessment. Similarity percentages are not automatic grounds for acceptance or rejection; editors examine the nature, source, extent, citation, and context of any overlap. Serious concerns may lead to rejection, further investigation, or post-publication measures.

17. Allegations of Research Misconduct

Concerns about fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, manipulated peer review, authorship misconduct, image or data manipulation, or other breaches of research integrity may be reported to the Editorial Office with supporting evidence.

Allegations will be assessed fairly, confidentially, and in proportion to their seriousness. The editorial team may seek an explanation from the individuals concerned, consult independent experts, or refer matters to relevant institutions where appropriate. Individuals affected should be given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Possible outcomes include no further action, request for clarification or revision, rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

Good-faith reports should be handled without retaliation. Final editorial action must be documented and based on available evidence.

18. Conflict of Interest Policy

Authors, reviewers, editors, Volume Editors, and publishing personnel must disclose relevant financial, commercial, professional, institutional, or personal relationships that may influence, or appear to influence, scholarly judgments.

Editors should reassign the handling of a submission when conflicts prevent impartial decision-making; conflicted reviewers should decline the invitation or disclose the concern promptly. Research funding, sponsorship, chapter processing charges, and institutional partnerships must not determine review recommendations or acceptance decisions.

19. Post-Publication Discussion

Scholarly commentary and evidence-based discussion after publication are welcomed when they contribute to the clarification, verification, or advancement of engineering knowledge. Readers may submit substantive questions, concerns, or technical comments about published chapters to the Editorial Office using the official contact channel.

Comments should identify the publication concerned, explain the issue, and provide supporting evidence or technical reasoning. Editors may seek a response from the authors and, where warranted, issue or link a clarification, correction, or other formal notice. The series does not claim to operate a public comment platform unless one is separately announced.

20. Correction and Retraction Policy

When a published chapter contains a material error that does not invalidate its overall findings, a correction may be issued with a clear description of the change. A retraction may be necessary if results are unreliable due to major error or misconduct, including fabrication, falsification, substantial plagiarism, or unethical research.

An expression of concern may be published while credible unresolved questions are investigated. Notices should clearly identify and link to the original publication and explain the reason for editorial action, while preserving the scholarly record wherever practical.

21. Review Process Policy

All submitted scholarly chapters undergo initial editorial screening for scope, originality, academic quality, ethical compliance, and technical relevance. Manuscripts that pass screening normally proceed to evaluation by at least two independent, qualified reviewers.

Reviewers assess methodological rigor, engineering validity, novelty, presentation, interpretation, and suitability for the volume, and they must treat manuscripts confidentially. Editors consider reviewer reports and any revised manuscript before issuing a decision, which may be acceptance, minor or major revision, further review, or decline. Submission, invitation, sponsorship, and payment do not guarantee acceptance.

22. Access Policy

Collaborate Engineering Daily Book Series supports open access to the scholarly chapters and volumes it publishes. Readers may access and read the available published content online without a subscription or reader access charge.

Download formats, lawful reuse, sharing, adaptation, and redistribution are governed by the chapter's stated copyright and license terms. Any applicable author-side publication charges are separate from reader access and must be disclosed transparently before payment is requested.

23. Ownership and Management Information

Collaborate Engineering Daily Book Series is academically managed through its Series Editor-in-Chief, Series Editors, Volume Editors, Peer Reviewers, and Editorial Office. The editorial team oversees manuscript assessment, peer review, editorial decisions, and the integrity of the publication record.

The legal publisher or owning organization, its official address, website, and editorial contact information must be publicly identified on the website and, where applicable, in the imprint of each published volume.