Peer Reviewer Proccess

All manuscripts submitted to the Indonesian Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (IJAIR) undergo a rigorous, double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both the identities of authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation.

Review Workflow

  1. Initial Screening

    • The Editor-in-Chief and Managing Editor evaluate the submission for relevance to the journal’s scope, quality of writing, originality, and adherence to submission guidelines.

    • Plagiarism detection software is used at this stage.

  2. Assignment to Reviewers

    • Each manuscript is assigned to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers, selected based on their expertise in the subject matter.

    • In certain cases, a third reviewer may be invited to ensure a balanced evaluation.

  3. Review Criteria
    Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript on the basis of:

    • Novelty and originality of the work

    • Technical and scientific rigor

    • Clarity of problem formulation and methodology

    • Relevance to the AI community

    • Ethical considerations and proper citation practices

  4. Optional AI-assisted Review Support

    • Reviewers may use AI tools such as ChatGPT or similar LLM-based systems to assist in identifying issues in clarity, logical consistency, or writing structure.

    • However, final reviewer recommendations must reflect the human expert’s own academic judgment, and AI tools are to be used only as supplementary aids, not decision-makers.

    • Reviewers are encouraged to disclose if AI tools were used during the evaluation.

  5. Decision and Feedback

    • After all reviews are submitted, the editorial team makes a decision: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

    • Constructive reviewer comments are shared with the author, ensuring transparency and learning value.

  6. Revision and Re-review

    • If revisions are required, the manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for a second round of evaluation.

  7. Final Decision

    • The Editor-in-Chief, based on reviewer feedback and final manuscript quality, makes the final publication decision.

Ethical Notes

  • All reviewers are bound by confidentiality and are required to adhere to COPE’s ethical standards.

  • Any use of AI tools for review support must not compromise the objectivity or integrity of the review.