Review Process

AUSMT operates an on-line submission and peer review system to facilitate rapid peer review. The journal adopts the single blind peer review process, which is described in the following:

Initial manuscript evaluation

Author uploads file to journal Web site, select the related scopes and enter metadata for indexing. After submitted, Manager Editors will assign submission to Area Associate Editors. And then, Area Associate Editors evaluate each manuscript to determine if its topic and content is suitable for consideration by the AUSMT.

Manuscripts that do not meet minimum criteria are returned to the authors within three week of receipt. This is in the best interest of the authors who could then decide to either correct the problems or to submit the manuscript to a more appropriate venue, avoiding delays from a lengthy review process that would nonetheless lead to rejection.

Peer review

Manuscripts that pass the initial review are assigned to an Area Associate Editor, who selects several Reviewers based on their expertise in that particular field. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two Reviewers. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, soundness of methodology, impact to automation and smart technology research, and relevance to practices. If the Reviewers give conflicting advice, a senior Reviewer acts as an adjudicator.

Reviewers are asked to write a report on the manuscript based on the following considerations:

1. Originality: Is the work original? Does the work contain substantial additional material to that already published?
2. Motivation: Is the subject of the work significant?
3. Methodology: Is the work scientifically rigorous and correct?
4. Clarity: Does the paper express ideas and concepts clearly and concisely?
5. Soundness of findings: Are the results derived based on solid ground?
6. Appropriateness: Is the subject appropriate for the journal?
7. Referencing: Does the paper make appropriate reference to earlier contributions?
8. Title: Is it appropriate for the content of the article?
9. Abstract: Does it contain the essential information of the article?
10. Text and mathematics: Are they easy to understand?
11. Figures, tables and captions: Are they essential and clear?
12. Conclusion: Does it summarize the findings of the work and the importance of the work?
13. Balance: Does the paper have good balance and structure?
14. English: Is the English satisfactory?

Presentation

To facilitate timely publication, Reviewers are asked to complete their reviews within one month. After collecting the Reviewers' reports, the Area Associate Editor makes a recommendation on the acceptability of the manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief.

Final Decision

The Area Associate Editor makes the final decision to accept or reject the article. The final decision will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the Reviewers.