Open Access Statement 

    Gazi Journal of Engineering Sciences (GJES) is a fully open access journal. All articles are freely accessible online immediately upon publication, with no subscription or access fees. Readers may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original authors.

    The journal adheres to the principles of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) and publishes all content under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. Under this licence, authors retain copyright of their work while granting the journal the right to publish, distribute, and promote the article.        
     There is no embargo period: all published materials are made open access immediately. Authors are also encouraged to deposit all versions of their manuscripts in institutional or disciplinary repositories, in accordance with the journal’s Self-Archiving Policy.

For all licenses mentioned above, authors can retain copyright and all publication rights without restriction. 

Plagiarism and Similarity Policy

     All manuscripts submitted to GJES undergo a mandatory plagiarism and similarity screening conducted by the journal prior to editorial evaluation. This assessment is performed using reputable similarity detection tools to ensure the originality and academic integrity of all submissions.

    Manuscripts presenting a similarity index exceeding 15%—excluding bibliographic references and properly cited quotations—are considered to not meet the journal’s originality requirements and are therefore rejected without entering the double anonymous peer review process.
    Authors are fully responsible for ensuring that their submissions are original, properly cited, and free from all forms of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism. By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm adherence to ethical publishing standards and guarantee that the work has neither been published previously nor is under review elsewhere.
    The journal reserves the right to conduct additional similarity checks at any stage of the editorial or publication process and to take appropriate actions—such as withdrawal or retraction—if plagiarism concerns arise following acceptance or publication.

Archiving Policy 

All published articles are securely archived and preserved through TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM DergiPark, which provides long-term digital storage and permanent access. Authors may also archive their work in institutional or disciplinary repositories in accordance with the journal’s Self-Archiving Policy.

Self-Archiving Policy

Gazi Journal of Engineering Sciences allows and encourages authors to deposit all versions of their manuscripts in institutional or disciplinary repositories of their choice. The journal’s policy regarding the self-archiving of different versions is as follows:

Submitted Version (Pre-print):
Authors may deposit the version submitted to the journal at any time, including before peer review.

Accepted Version (Author Accepted Manuscript – AAM):
Authors may deposit the peer-reviewed and accepted version immediately upon acceptance.

Published Version (Version of Record – VoR):
Authors may deposit the final published version after publication, provided that the journal is cited as the original source and a link to the article’s DOI is included.

PUBLICATION ETHICS & MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

Gazi Journal of Engineering Sciences (e-ISSN 2149-9373) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and ensuring the integrity of all scholarly work published in the journal. Ethical principles are applied throughout the editorial and publication processes, and all parties involved—editors, authors, reviewers, and the publisher—are expected to adhere to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.

The journal fully complies with the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing jointly issued by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME.

DUTIES OF EDITOR-IN-CHIEF & SECTION EDITORS

1. Objectivity and Editorial Independence

The Editor-in-Chief and Section Editors are responsible for making publication decisions based solely on the scholarly merit of the submitted manuscripts. Authors shall not be discriminated against on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, citizenship, political philosophy, or any other personal attributes. Editorial decisions regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection are determined by the manuscript’s originality, scientific importance, clarity, methodological quality, and its relevance to the scope of the journal.

2. Confidentiality

Editors must ensure the confidentiality of all submitted materials. No information about a manuscript may be disclosed to anyone apart from the corresponding author, assigned reviewers, potential reviewers, and necessary editorial and publishing staff. Editors must guarantee that all submitted content remains confidential throughout the peer-review process.

3. Conflicts of Interest and Disclosure

Editors must not use unpublished information obtained through submitted manuscripts for their own research or personal advantage.
Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts when conflicts of interest exist—such as competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, institutions, or companies associated with the manuscript.
In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief assigns another qualified editor to manage the submission.

4. Peer Review Process

The Editor-in-Chief and Section Editors must ensure that each manuscript undergoes a rigorous double-blind peer-review process, ensuring fairness, transparency, and adherence to the journal’s ethical standards.
Editors are responsible for selecting qualified reviewers, overseeing the workflow, and ensuring timely completion of the review process.

5. Management of Unethical Behaviour

Before peer review, all submissions are screened by the journal using the similarity detection tool intihal.net (and, when necessary, other comparable software such as iThenticate or Turnitin). Manuscripts exhibiting excessive similarity—typically above 15%—or showing evidence of plagiarism are rejected prior to review and returned to the authors.
Editors, in cooperation with the publisher, must take appropriate actions when ethical concerns or complaints are raised regarding submitted or published work. These actions may include requesting corrections, issuing retractions, or publishing expressions of concern, in accordance with COPE guidelines.

DUTIES OF AUTHOR(S)

Authorship Criteria
Authorship is limited to individuals who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All contributors who have played an essential role in the preparation of the manuscript must be listed as co-authors, and all listed authors must approve the final version before submission.

Originality and Plagiarism
Authors are fully responsible for ensuring the originality, accuracy, and integrity of their manuscript. Submitted work must be entirely original, and any use of others’ words, ideas, data, or results must be properly cited or quoted. Plagiarism—including copying, paraphrasing without attribution, or presenting another researcher’s results as one’s own—is strictly unacceptable.
Before peer review, all submissions are screened for similarity by the journal using the intihal.net plagiarism detection tool (and, when necessary, comparable software such as iThenticate).

Reporting Standards
Authors must provide a clear, accurate, and objective account of their research, including a balanced discussion of its significance. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to allow replication by other researchers. Fabrication, falsification, misleading statements, or inaccurate representation of data constitute unethical behaviour and are strictly prohibited.

Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide raw data related to the manuscript for editorial evaluation, and they must be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable period after publication.

Acknowledgement of Funding Sources
All financial support and funding sources relevant to the research must be clearly acknowledged at the end of the manuscript before the references. Any institutional, project-based, or grant support should be transparently stated.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose any financial or personal relationships that could influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript. Potential conflicts include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications, and grant support. Conflicts of interest must be declared at the earliest possible stage.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
Authors should refrain from submitting a manuscript that another journal is currently reviewing. Submitting the same work to multiple journals concurrently or publishing redundant versions of the same study without disclosure is unethical and prohibited. Authors must ensure the manuscript has not been previously published.

Correction of Errors
If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief or publisher and cooperate fully to retract or correct the article as required.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Reviewers play a central role in maintaining the integrity, quality, and trustworthiness of the peer review process and, ultimately, of scholarly publishing. Reviewers are expected to uphold the highest ethical standards in their conduct.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists editors in making informed editorial decisions and helps authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should provide unbiased, fair, and evidence-based evaluations that reflect their expert judgment on the scientific quality and rigor of the work.

Timeliness and Commitment
Reviewers must complete reviews within the agreed timeframe. If a reviewer feels unqualified to assess the manuscript, lacks adequate expertise, or cannot complete the review on time, they must notify the editor promptly so that alternative reviewers can be appointed without delay.

Confidentiality
All manuscripts and related materials received for review must be treated as strictly confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or distribute any content of the manuscript with anyone else unless explicitly authorized by the editor. Reviewers must also protect their own review reports and any communication linked to the review process.

Objectivity and Respect
Reviews must be conducted objectively and professionally, avoiding personal criticism of authors. Reviewers must provide clear, constructive, and respectful comments, supported by evidence, on the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript. Opinions should be grounded in academic standards and not in personal preferences or biases.

Ethical Oversight and Detection of Issues
Reviewers should remain attentive to potential ethical issues such as plagiarism, duplicate publication, undeclared conflicts of interest, data fabrication or falsification, inappropriate citation practices, or other forms of research misconduct. Any such concerns must be promptly reported to the editor with sufficient information to enable further investigation.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers should disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review. Conflicts can stem from competitive, collaborative, financial, institutional, or personal relationships with authors or their work. If a conflict exists, reviewers should decline to review to avoid biased assessment.

Appropriate Use of Suggestions
Reviewers should only recommend citations for valid scholarly reasons, not to promote their own or others' work. Citation recommendations should be justified and directly relevant to the manuscript’s scientific content.

Respect for the Peer Review Model
Reviewers should respect the journal’s peer review model (e.g., double-blind) and must not attempt to identify the authors’ identities or reveal their own identity unless the journal explicitly permits open review. Any discussion with colleagues about the manuscript must be approved by the editor.

Responsible Use of Technology
Reviewers must adhere to policies regarding the use of tools or technologies (including AI tools) when writing or preparing reviews, and they must ensure that the confidentiality and integrity of the review process are maintained.

PUBLICATION POLICY 

Gazi Journal of Engineering Sciences (GJES) is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal operating in accordance with recognized standards of scholarly publishing. The journal adheres to COPE guidelines and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

Publication Frequency and Scope
GJES is published three times a year (April, August, December) in electronic format only. The journal publishes original research articles in all fields of engineering and technology. Manuscripts may be submitted in Turkish or English.

Peer-Review Process
All submissions undergo a double-blind peer-review process. Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two reviewers, and acceptance requires approval from both reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board make the final publication decision.
The review and evaluation process is typically completed within an average of 120 days, depending on reviewer availability.

Open Access and Publication Fees
GJES adopts an open-access publishing policy.
No fees are charged for submission, review, publication, or access.
AAuthors and reviewers do not receive any financial compensation.

Plagiarism Screening
Before review, all submissions are checked using intihal.net (and, when necessary, other similarity-checking tools).
Manuscripts with a similarity score above 15% are returned or rejected without initiating peer review.
If plagiarism is detected after publication, the article may be retracted and an editorial note will be issued.

Submission Conditions
Submitted manuscripts must:
- be original and unpublished,
- not be under review elsewhere,
- comply with the journal’s format, aim, scope, and ethical standards,
- demonstrate sufficient scientific quality and originality.
Manuscripts based on theses, conference proceedings, or funded projects must clearly disclose this information in a footnote on the first page.

Revision Policy
If a manuscript receives a revision decision, authors must submit the revised version within 15 days. FFailure to comply with these requirements may result in rejection.

Editorial Assessment Before Review
Prior to peer review, the editorial team evaluates submissions for:
- adherence to journal format and style,
- compliance with aim and scope,
- ethical standards,
- scientific quality and novelty.
Only manuscripts that pass this initial assessment are sent to reviewers.

Equality and Editorial Independence
All authors are treated equally and without discrimination. No privileges are granted during the submission, evaluation, or publication process. Articles are normally published in the order of acceptance; however, the Editorial Board may adjust publication order when necessary.

Copyright and Licensing
After acceptance, authors must sign the Copyright Transfer Form.
PGJES makes published articles available while retaining full publication rights.