1. Review Process

The journal strictly implements a standardized manuscript review process, which consists of four main stages: preliminary review, secondary review, external peer review, and final review.

All submissions are first subject to an internal academic screening, including a preliminary review by the handling editor and a secondary review by the deputy director of the editorial office. Manuscripts that lack originality, contain serious scientific or technical flaws, fail to provide valuable information, or fall outside the journal’s scope will be rejected at this stage.

Then, the manuscripts enter the crucial external peer review stage, where their academic quality and originality are evaluated. The journal adopts a double-blind peer review system. Each manuscript is sent to two independent reviewers. For manuscripts requiring revision after peer review, authors must respond to the reviewers’ comments point by point and submit the revised version within the specified time. This process will be repeated until both reviewers and editors are satisfied with the manuscript, or the manuscript is ultimately rejected.

The final decision on acceptance is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on the comprehensive evaluation.

2. Internal Submissions

Submissions from the journal's editorial board members, editors, and guest editors follow the same review process as other submissions. The peer review will be conducted independently of the submitting editorial board members, editors, guest editors, and their research team. In addition, editorial board members, editors, and guest editors must not participate in the review of manuscripts submitted by themselves, their family members, colleagues, or any authors with whom they have a conflict of interest.

3. Academic Misconduct Detection

The editorial office uses the Academic Misconduct Literature Check (AMLC) System by CNKI to screen all submitted manuscripts for plagiarism.

The journal strictly prohibits multiple submissions, plagiarism, and any other forms of academic misconduct. If such behavior is detected, the manuscript will be rejected immediately. Furthermore, if academic misconduct is discovered after an article has been officially published, the editorial office will retract the article. Any resulting consequences are the sole responsibility of the authors to address and resolve.

4. Special Issues and Columns

The review process outlined above also applies to submissions for special issues or columns. Manuscripts submitted for special issues will undergo the same review and editorial process as regular submissions, and the final decision on acceptance is likewise made by the editor-in-chief based on a comprehensive evaluation. The editor-in-chief is responsible for the entire content of the journal, including special issues and columns.

When organizing a special issue or column, the editorial office may invite leading experts in the relevant field to serve as guest editors. The responsibilities of guest editors include assisting the editorial office in soliciting submissions, coordinating peer review, and addressing any issues that arise during publication. The work of guest editors is subject to the supervision of the editor-in-chief to ensure fairness in the review process.

5. Corrections and Retractions

If, after publication, an article is found to contain unintentional scientific errors that do not significantly affect the results and conclusions, the editorial office will publish corrections in the journal as soon as possible, detailing the changes made to the original article. If serious scientific errors are found in published articles, or if the article is suspected of academic misconduct such as plagiarism and data falsification, the editorial office will issue a statement to inform readers of the risks, initiate an investigation, and announce the final outcome, or even retract the article with a retraction statement if necessary.