matics
Definition of „new scientific results”
Presentation of observation and surveying methods, data obtained from measurements and model computations, the results of their spatial-temporal analysis and interpretation and description of all the related theoretical considerations, processing methods and algorithms forming essential part of the manuscript are acknowledged as new achievements by both the Advisory and the Editorial Boards of Publications in Geomatics if those are unpublished (i.e. not available publicly either in printed or in digital form) either by the Author(s) or by other natural or legal person in 50% at least, related to its total scientific information content. The measure of overlapping with other published results should be kept at a level which is indispensable for the understanding of the discussion and for the argumentation of the conclusions. Formal one-to-one coincidence with earlier publications either in wording or in the visual outlook of the manuscript is not allowed except in possession of a written permission from the copyright holder of the reprinted material considered.
The new scientific achievements should be briefly emphasized in the introductory part of the manuscript where the background of the research is described by application of proper referencing of earlier publications. It helps the referees to evaluate the novelty of the research results presented both in national and international scales.
Mit tekintünk lektorálási folyamatnak?
In the first step the uploaded manuscript is subject of a preliminary evaluation by the responsible editor who is automatically assigned to the ms based on the field(s) of interest declared by the Author(s). The responsible editor focuses on the following questions:
- Does the ms meet the topical definitions of Publications in Geomatics?
- Does the ms contain new information sufficient for publication?
- Are there typical format errors and contextual deficiencies in the ms the correction of which makes the work of Referees smoother and easier?
As soon as the ms is accepted for review by the responsible editor, she/he assigns 2 independent Referees to the ms, who are probably not in conflict of interest with the Author(s). By default the Referees are anonym but it can be omitted upon request when the Referee’s score sheet is being completed. The “no conflict of interest” has to be declared also on the score sheet if applicable.
The proofreading starts when 2 accepted invitations for review are available. A Referee has 30 days to complete her/his review. The review results are available for the Author(s) if both reviews are properly closed. At the same time the Referees can also access the reviews of each other keeping the actual state of anonymity. The Author(s) has (have) 30 days to make the requested and suggested corrections, modifications and to response the critics formulated by the Referees.
A Referee must fill out a score sheet which can be shortly explained. Furthermore, the upload of a detailed review and/or the corrected manuscript is also obligatory. The review cycle can be closed only if these conditions above met. Partial saving of the Referee’s work is provided by the system.
Based on the review results the responsible editor either starts a new review cycle by granting the corresponding Author access to her/his revised ms or closes the cycle and initiates the technical editing. In this phase the ms gets its final form and outlook managed by the technical editor according to the template file provided by the journal. The full process ends with a final proofreading which lets the Author to correct only small, mainly typing errors, misspellings, etc... which does not influence the content essentially. The Author(s) has (have) 48 hours to proofread the ms by making a list of errors or declare that the present form and content of the ms is aware to, accepted and can be passed to printing. The lack of this declaration gives consent.
Ethics and rules of manuscript handling
Each and every member of the Editorial and the Advisory Boards as well as the Referees are obliged to handle any data and information inherent in the manuscripts and auxiliary review materials (corrected manuscripts, messages, comments, etc...) uploaded to the editorial system of Publications in Geomatics confidentially in both the review and technical editing phase of the publication process. Only an explicitly written permission from the Author(s) abates this obligation.
Those materials which are created by using of the editorial system regardless if those were generated by the editorial or the Referee?s or the Author?s web pages, or are uploaded to the system as digital files will be archived as soon as the printing preparations of the actual volume starts. The archived materials can be retrieved from the system on good grounds by asking the permission of the editor in chief in a written request.
If any member of the Editorial or the Advisory Boards as well as any of the Referees possesses any information related to professional and ethical questions provided this has an influence on the merit on the publishing process of the manuscript under consideration are obliged to inform the editor in chief about the case. The editor in chief must consult the case with those editors and advisory board members who are professionally adequate in the scope and then must make a decision about the fate of the manuscript. The Author(s) has (have) to be involved in the clarification of problems too.
See for more details: https://publicationethics.org/