All manuscripts are peer-reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving.

Initial manuscript evaluation

The editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Reasons for rejection at this stage include insufficient originality and scientific merits, obvious technical flaws, poor writing, inappropriate length, and improper match to the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on for peer review typically by two external experts.

Type of peer review

This journal employs single blind review, where the referees remains anonymous for the author throughout the process.

How the referee is selected

The handling Editor may choose to review the paper directly, or send it to referees, who are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for referees from the author though these recommendations are not necessarily used.

Referee reports

Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

1. Is original
2. Is methodologically sound
3. Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
4. Correctly references previous relevant work

Referees are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but they may, if they so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.

How long does the review process take?

Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within three months, but review time may be longer or shorter in individual cases. Should the referees' reports contradict one another or a report be unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. Revised manuscripts are returned to the referees for re-review at the discretion of the handling Editor, depending on the nature and significance of the revisions.

Final report

The final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the Editor and by the referees.

Becoming a Referee for Advanced Electromagnetics

If you are not currently a referee for the journal, but would like to be added to the list of referees for this title, please contact the Editor-in-Chief.

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 PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) to digitally preserve the authentic original version of the content.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Advanced Electromagnetics is electronic peer reviewed open access journal committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. In order to provide our readers with a journal of highest quality we state the following principles of Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement. All articles not in accordance with these standards will be removed from the publication if malpractice is discovered at any time even after the publication. Advanced Electromagnetics is checking all papers in a single-blind peer review process. We also check for plagiats and research fabrication (making up research data); falsification (manipulation of existing research data, tables, or images) and improper use of humans or animals in research. In accordance with the code of conduct we will report any cases of suspected plagiarism or duplicate publishing. Advanced Electromagnetics reserves the right to use plagiarism detecting software to screen submitted papers at all times.

Authors

The submitting (corresponding) author is responsible for ensuring that the article's publication has been approved by all the co-authors. Authors must ensure that they have written original works. In addition they must ensure that the manuscript has not been issued elsewhere. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources should be appropriately credited and referenced. Authors are also responsible for language editing before submitting the article. Authors submitting their works to the journal for publication as original articles confirm that the submitted works represent their authors’ contributions and have not been copied or plagiarized in whole or in part from other works without clearly citing. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources (including online sites) should be appropriately credited and referenced. All authors should disclose financial or other conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript (financial support for the project should be disclosed). 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 and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. An author agrees to the license agreement before submitting the article. All articles must be submitted using online submission procedure. Submitting a paper simultaneously to more than one publication at a time is a breach of publications ethics.

Editors

Editors ust ensure a fair single-blind peer-review of the submitted articles for publication. They will strive to prevent any potential conflict of interests between the author and editorial and review personnel. Editors will also ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential before publishing. Editor-in-Chief will coordinate the work of the editors.

Reviewers

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on content without regard to ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, religious belief or political philosophy of the authors. They must ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential and must report to the Editor-in-Chief if they are aware of copyright infringement and plagiarism on the author’s side. They must evaluate the submitted works objectively as well as present clearly their opinions on the works in a clear way in the review form. A reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor-in-Chief and excuse himself from the review process.

Privacy Statement

The names and e-mail addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.