Peer Review Policy

This journal employs double-blind peer review, which means neither the reviewers nor the authors will be aware of the identity of the author(s) of the work under consideration.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities:

See the basic principles of peer-review policies here

Invited reviewers are anticipated to conduct a thorough evaluation of the papers, taking into account the following elements:

  • Treat the manuscript as confidential.
  • Maintain anonymity and avoid disclosing reviewer identity to authors.
  • Notify the editor if the assigned manuscript is being considered for publication elsewhere.
  • Report any instances of possible research misconduct.
  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest related to authors or the manuscript content.
  • Submit all necessary information within specified deadlines.
  • Review multiple versions of the manuscript as required.
  • Make recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for journal publication.
  • Suggest alternative reviewers if unable to review the manuscript.
  • Write the review report exclusively in English and provide a commentary for publication related to the reviewed manuscript.
  • Refrain from using the work described in the manuscript.
  • Review the manuscript critically and provide constructive feedback to help authors enhance the quality of the research.
  • Do not pass the assigned manuscript to another reviewer.
  • Ensure the manuscript demonstrates high quality and original research.

During the process of manuscript review, reviewers are advised to carefully consider the following aspects:

  • Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript for novelty and originality.
  • They need to consider the scientific reliability of the research, including methods and results.
  • Reviewers should assess the manuscript’s contribution to the scientific community.
  • Ethical considerations should be evaluated for potential issues.
  • The structure of the article and adherence to the author’s guidelines should be assessed.
  • Reviewers should check the references to ensure their adequacy.
  • Grammar, punctuation, and spelling should be checked for clarity and readability.
  • Reviewers should watch for signs of scientific misconduct and report concerns.

The main procedure of AI Letters double-blind peer-review:

  • Submitted papers will be evaluated by the EIC and managing editors first. 
  • The papers may be rejected initially due to serious scientific and research flaws, poorly written language, being out of scope, having high similarity, poor contribution, and insufficient originality. 
  • Once papers are approved in the initial evaluation stage, they will pass through a double-blind peer-review process conducted in collaboration with editorial board members (handling editor) and independent reviewers. 
  • At least two reviewers will review the manuscript. The reviewers will check whether the manuscript is original, technically and methodologically sound, well-presented, and the results are clear. The first decision will be provided within 2-4 weeks after submission.
  • Up to 10 days will be given to the authors to meet the comments and resubmit the revised version. Once the authors have revised and resubmitted the manuscript, the handling editor and reviewers will be notified to double-check the track changes and the improvements. The final decision (accept, reject, or request for further revision) will be sent to the authors.  

AI Letters encourages the authors to submit their manuscripts using our Journal Managing system. Reviewers can also use the reviewer’s panel.
-->