Editorial Policies


Focus and Scope

  1. Kecerdasan Buatan
  2. IOT
  3. Big Data
  4. Machine Learning
  5. Jaringan komputer
  6. Sistem Informasi

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Papers are double-blindly reviewed by experts and specialists in computer science, engineering, and technology relating to informatics on development. When a paper past an initial review, it will be reviewed by at least two reviewers. Otherwise, the paper will be sent back to the author for correction and re-submission.

The initial review makes by Info.Tech editorials journal. In this stage, editors will check plagiarism using the proper tool. The following step is to assess comprehensively papers by editors whether their fit the template or not, such as the number of references and their categories, the ages of referenced sources, and the referenced tables/ figures/ formulas.

The paper will be distributed to two reviewers by first deleting author information from the paper. The reviewers use our review guidelines to judge your paper. We will let you know as soon as the reviews are done.

 

Publication Frequency

Jurnal Info.Tech) is a periodical, scientific, and peer-reviewed journal published by Universitas Proklamasi 45 Yogyakarta, Indonesia (UP 45), twice a year (biannually) in march and August.

 

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. Thus, INFO.TECH is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. It is because journal articles should be disseminated as widely as possible.

 

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...

 

Publication Ethic

Anti Plagiarism Policy

It is basically the author’s duty to only submit a manuscript that is free from plagiarism and academic malpractices. The editor, however, double-checks each article before its publication. The first step is to check plagiarism against as much as possible online databases by using a specific tool such as Turnitin. A maximum of 25% of similarities is allowed for all submitted papers. After the authors upload the revised paper, the editor will check this paper's similarity again for assuring the maximum 25% is still maintained

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. Thus, INFO.TECH is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. It is because journal articles should be disseminated as widely as possible.

Authors' Responsibilites

Authors of Info.tech are responsible to obey the Author Guidelines of Info.Tech, Info.Tech Copyright, and those 10 policies adopted from COPE.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

Reviewers of Info.Tech should be responsible to comply with the above 10 policies from COPE. Factors that are considered in the review process are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.

Editors' Responsibilities

Editors of Info.Tech should be responsible to adhere to 10 policies from COPE. Editors should set up their decisions completely on the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to publication’s focus, and scope.

Retraction

The papers published in Info.Tech  will be considered to retract in the publication if:

  • They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error)
  • The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
  • It constitutes plagiarism
  • It reports unethical research

the mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as follows:

  1. An article requiring potential retraction is brought to the attention of the journal editor.
  2. The journal editor should follow the step-by-step guidelines according to the COPE flowcharts (including evaluating a response from the author of the article in question).
  3. Before any action is taken, the editor's findings should be sent to Editorial Board for review. The purpose of this step is to ensure a consistent approach in accordance with industry best practice.
  4. The final decision as to whether to retract is then communicated to the author and, if necessary, any other relevant bodies, such as the author's institution on occasion.
  5. The retraction statement is then posted online and published in the next available issue of the journal (see below for more details of this step).

Complaints procedure
To challenge to a retraction or a related issue, Info.Tech’s procedure is as follows:

  1. The complaint may be submitted via the journal editor or directly to Info.Tech at info.tech@up45.ac.id.
  2. An independent investigation is then carried out by at least two representatives from Info.Tech’s Editorial Board.
  3. The investigation involves reviewing all correspondence relating to the case in question and, if necessary, obtaining further written responses to queries from the parties involved.
  4. The purpose of the investigation is to establish that correct procedures have been followed, that decisions have been reached based on academic criteria, that personal prejudice or bias of some kind has not influenced the outcome, and that appropriate sanctions have been applied where relevant.
  5. The investigatory panel will then submit its findings to INFO.TECH's Editorial Board for further review before any onward communications to the appropriate parties.

Complainants may choose to take their complaint to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to Info.tech will be screen and checked for plagiarism by using plagiarism by using  detection (Ithenticate)