Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement
ACTA TECHNICA CORVINIENSIS – Bulletin of
Engineering is dedicated to following the best
practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the
important responsibilities of the editorial board. Any
kind of unethical behavior is not acceptable, and the
Journal does not tolerate plagiarism in any form.
The ethic statements of the
ACTA TECHNICA CORVINIENSIS – Bulletin of Engineering
are based on
Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers
Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors
Committee on Publication
It is necessary to agree upon
standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties
involved in the act of publishing: the author, the
proceedings editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher.
SECTION A: Publication and Authorship
By submitting a manuscript to this journal, each author
explicitly confirms that the manuscript meets the
highest ethical standards for authors and coauthors.
All manuscripts must be submitted using the format
outlined in the Instructions to Authors.
The Editor-in-Chief and the reviewers evaluate
manuscripts for their intellectual content without
regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious
belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political
philosophy of the Authors.
All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review
process by at least two international reviewers that are
experts in the area of the particular paper and they will make a recommendation to accept,
reject, or modify the manuscript.
The reviewing of manuscripts is an essential step in the
The factors that are taken into account in review are
relevance, significance, originality, readability and
The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance
with revisions (minor or major), or rejection.
If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a
submission, there is no guarantee that the revised
submission will be accepted.
Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal
requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel,
copyright infringement and plagiarism.
No research can be included in more than one publication
Redundant, or Concurrent Publications).
It is unethical for an author to publish manuscripts
describing essentially the same research in more than
one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same
manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is
unethical and unacceptable.
The Editor-in-Chief, the members of the Editorial Board,
and any editorial staff must not disclose any
information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other
than the authors of the manuscript, reviewers, potential
reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher,
SECTION B: Authors' Responsibilities & Duties
An author's central obligation is to present a concise,
accurate account of the research performed as well as an
objective discussion of its significance.
Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their
original work, and if the authors have used the work
and/or words of others that this has been appropriately
cited or quoted. Authors must state that all data in the
paper are real and authentic. Fraudulent or knowingly
inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and
Authors must certify that the manuscript has not
previously been published or is not currently being
considered for publication elsewhere. An author should
not in general publish manuscripts describing
essentially the same research in more than one journal
or conference. Submitting the same manuscript to more
than one journal or conference constitutes unethical
publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
All Authors mentioned in the paper must have
significantly contributed to the research. Authorship
should be limited to those who have made a significant
contribution to the conception, design, execution, or
interpretation of the reported study. All those who have
made significant contributions should be listed as
co-authors. Where there are others who have participated
in certain substantive aspects of the research project,
they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all
appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors
are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have
seen and approved the final version of the paper and
have agreed to its submission for publication.
Authors must participate in the peer review process.
Authors are obliged to provide retractions or
corrections of mistakes.
Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of
Authors must identify all sources used in the creation
of their manuscript.
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always
be given. Authors should cite publications that have
been influential in determining the nature of the
An author should make no changes to a paper after it has
been accepted. If there is a compelling reason to make
changes, the author is obligated to inform the editor
directly of the nature of the desired change. Only the
editor has the final authority to approve any such
Authors must report any errors they discover in their
published paper to the Editors. When an author discovers
a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own
published work, it is the author’s obligation to
promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and
cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the
SECTION C: Reviewers' Responsibilities & Duties
of Reviewers of Manuscripts)
Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers,
obtained through peer review, confidential and treat
them as privileged information or ideas, and not used
for personal advantage.
Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no
personal criticism of the author.
A reviewer of a manuscript should judge objectively the
quality of the manuscript and respect the intellectual
independence of the authors. In no case is personal
Reviewers should express their views clearly with
Reviewers should explain and support their judgments
adequately so that editors and authors may understand
the basis of their comments. Any statement that an
observation, derivation, or argument had been previously
reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that
has not been cited by the authors.
Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief's
attention any substantial similarity or overlap between
the manuscript under consideration and any other
published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they
have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive,
collaborative, or other relationships or connections
with any of the authors, companies, or institutions
connected to the papers.
Peer review assists Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial
Board in making editorial decisions and through the
editorial communications with the author may also assist
the author in improving the paper.
SECTION D: Editors' Responsibilities & Duties
Based on the review report of the editorial review
board, the editor can accept, reject, or request
modifications to the manuscript.
Editors have complete responsibility and authority to
accept a submitted paper for publication or to reject
it. The editor may confer with reviewers for an
evaluation to use in making this decision.
Editors are responsible for the contents and overall
quality of the publication.
Editors should always consider the needs of the authors
and the readers when attempting to improve the
Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and
the integrity of the academic record.
Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections
Editors should have a clear picture of a research's
Editors should base their decisions solely one the
papers' importance, originality, clarity and relevance
to publication's scope.
Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn
the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
Editors should ensure that all research material they
publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical
Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably
Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a
paper is published or unpublished, and make all
reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution
to the problem.
Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions,
they should have proof of misconduct.
Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest
between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.
The editors will be guided by
Committee on Publication
Guidelines for Retracting Articles when
considering retracting, issuing expressions of concern
about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles
that have been published.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted
manuscript will not be used in the own research of the
Editor-in-Chief or the members of the Editorial Board
without the express written consent of the author.
If the editor is presented with convincing evidence that
the main substance or conclusions of a paper published
in the journal are erroneous, the editor should
facilitate publication of an appropriate paper pointing
out the error and, if possible, correcting it.
University Politehnica Timisoara,
Faculty of Engineering Hunedoara,
Revolutiei, 331128, Hunedoara, ROMANIA