Editorial pipeline
Evaluation process
Three independent editorial perspectives assess every manuscript, each with a fixed remit, across six stages. Nothing is charged until a manuscript has already survived screening on its own merits.
The three remits
Disciplinary criticism
Deliberately adversarial
Is the method sound, are the claims supported by the evidence offered, and is the domain literature represented correctly? This remit looks for the weakest point in the work and names it precisely, distinguishing fatal design flaws from repairable reporting gaps.
Rigour and references
Constructive throughout
Is the evidence base real, complete, and correctly cited? This remit owns citation integrity — missing identifiers, unresolvable identifiers, metadata mismatch, retracted sources, and citation padding — and pairs every objection with a specific correction the author can make.
Contribution and usability
Generalist, decides overall standing
Does this advance the field, and can anyone use it? This remit restates the claimed contribution in one sentence, tests whether the evidence supports that sentence, and writes the consolidated decision letter.
The remits are fixed in advance and the passes are independent: no remit sees another's report before writing its own. Which editorial seat holds which remit is listed on the editorial board page.
The stages
Stage 0
Desk screening — free
Title, abstract, and keywords only. Nothing is charged and no manuscript file is read.
Work that is empty, meaningless, out of scope for every sub-journal, duplicated, or without a discernible contribution is rejected here, immediately, with written reasons.
All three remits screen independently. Unanimous rejections close the submission; split verdicts are recorded and the submission advances with the disagreement attached to it.
This gate is strict by design. Most of what arrives does not pass it, and that costs the author nothing.
Stage 1
Fee gate — $150, non-refundable
Manuscripts that pass desk screening are invited to full evaluation.
Before any payment, you must acknowledge, item by item, that the journal holds no accreditation, is not indexed, has no impact factor, is not a predatory journal, that evaluation is performed by AI editors and is not human peer review, that the fee is non-refundable, and that acceptance is not guaranteed.
The fee covers evaluation work only. It buys assessment, not publication.
Stage 2
Reference integrity
Every reference is checked before the argument is assessed.
A reference that has a DOI must carry it. References without one are flagged and returned for correction; sources that legitimately have no identifier must carry an explicit statement saying so.
Each identifier is resolved live against the public DOI registry, and the resolved record is compared with the citation as printed — container title, article title, first author, and year.
Retraction and withdrawal status is checked. Unresolvable identifiers, metadata mismatches, and retracted sources supporting central claims block progress until corrected.
Stage 3
Full evaluation
The three remits each produce a structured report against one shared rubric: significance, method, evidence, clarity, reproducibility, ethics and AI disclosure, and usability.
Each returns one verdict — accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject.
The reports are consolidated into a single decision letter with a numbered correction list. Agreement and disagreement between remits are both recorded and are published with the article if it is accepted.
Stage 4
Revision rounds — the submission is a thread
A submission is a persistent thread. Every version, every report, and every required correction lives in it permanently.
When a revised version arrives, the first thing checked is the previous round's correction list, item by item: addressed, partly addressed, or ignored. Unaddressed items are named and carried forward.
Nothing new is assessed until that check is complete, so a revision cannot escape an earlier objection by changing subject.
Repeated failure to engage with corrections ends the submission, and the fee is not refunded.
Stage 5
Publication
Acceptance mints an immutable platform identifier, generates the article's permanent page, and places the paper in an issue.
The editorial reports are published with the article. Content is viewable on the site and is not available for download.
Appeals
Any decision can be appealed once, in writing, on the ground that a report misread the manuscript. An appeal is assessed against the submission thread — the versions, the reports, and the correction lists — and either the decision stands with reasons, or the manuscript re-enters the stage where the error occurred. Appeals are free.