Language: Publication language can be Turkish and /or English. The manuscripts should be written in a clear and fluent manner with appropriate scientific and technical expressions. When the articles are written in Turkish, both Turkish and English abstract should be placed in the main text. When the articles are written in English, only English abstract is adequate. 

Articles  should not be included no longer needed or useful and well-known  information, as well as featureless sources as references. Previously published data, formulas and results should be cited by referring their original papers. Nomenclature, abbreviations and symbols should be used in accordance with international standards.  Abbreviations which are special to the articles and common for the relevant field should be indicated in parentheses in the first place their used. SI (Systemé International) units and abbreviations are accepted in the articles.

The manuscripts are required to comply with national and international ethic rules for publishing. Authors must pay attention to ICMJE (International Committee of Medcial Journal Editors) recommendations and COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines, namely “International Standards for Editors and Authors”.  

Format: Manuscripts must be prepared in accordance with the templates as follows:

Original_Article_Template_TR / Original_Article_Template_EN / Review_Article_Template_TR /  Review_Article_Template_EN  

The manuscripts must be uploaded in “.docx” extension.


2. Article Structure

Scaling: The page margins should be 2.5 cm (Right-Left-Above-Below). The margin values should not be changed in the template.

Title: A title should be comprehensive and understandable. The title should be written with Times New Roman (TNR) font in 14 size and it should be left aligned. The first letter should be written in capital letter and the rest are in lowercase. In Turkish articles, the relevant English title should be placed before the Turkish abstract. In terms of English title, the first letter should be capitalized, and should be written with TNR font in 12 size, as well as should be left aligned.

Author Names and Contacts: The name line should be placed as left aligned under the title line. The titles of the authors should not be written before names. The contact information should be given in full-length. A letter superscript should be used in terms of different contacts. The contact information should be written with TNR font in 7 size and italic style. In addition, the corresponding author's phone and e-mail address should be written with TNR font in 7 size.

Keywords: Immediately after the abstract, it should be provided a maximum of 8 and a minimum of 3 keywords. They should be written with TNR font in 7 size and left aligned. The first letter of keywords should be in capital letter. 

Abstract: Abstract should briefly state the purpose of the research, the principal results and major conclusions. In case of both Turkish and English versions, it should not exceed 250 words and it should be in one paragraph. It should be written with TNR font in 7 size and aligned on both sides.

Text: The main text of the manuscript should be written using TNR font in 10 size with 1.5 line spacing. Before paragraphs, line spacing should be set to 0 PT before spaces and 6 PT after spaces. The article should be divided into main sections with different titles and each section should be numbered. The titles should be written in Bold Font. In terms of main sections, the numbering should start from I (then II, III, …) and “Summary”, “Acknowledgments” and “References” should be not included in the section numbering. Considering the numbering of the related main section, secondary subsections should be numbered as 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, … and the first letters of the words placed the secondary titles should start with capital letters. Regarding  the secondary subsections, tertiary subsections should be numbered as 1.1.1., 1.1.2., 1.1.3…For the tertiary subsections, only the first letter of the first word should be capitalized. Fourth subsections should be underlined. The format of the article is illustrated as follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

It states the objectives of the work and provide an adequate background. In this section research subject should be explained avoiding giving a detailed literature survey or research results. References should not be given as group or sparse (eg [1-5] or [1, 2, 3, 5, 8]). The contribution of each source should be examined and stated in the text. Also, references should not be hyperlinked.


II. EXPERIMENTAL METHOD/THEORETICAL METHOD

In case of research driven by experimental study, test procedure / method should be explained in a clear way. If a theoretical study has been carried out, the theoretical method should be given in detail. If the method has been previously mentioned in published studies, the difference of the current study should be stated by referring to the previous studies.

2.1 Materials and Preparation Techniques

2.1.1. Characterization of materials


III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results should be clear and concise. Discussion parts should explore the significance of the results of the work by compared them with the literature.


IV. CONCLUSION

The main conclusions of the study may be presented in a short and clear ways.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It can be given before the resources section at the end of the article. A example for “Acknowledgement Section”; This study was supported with Yalova University BAPKO Graduate Thesis Project (2018/YL/0016).


REFERENCES

Citation

Reference citations in the text should be identified by numbers in square brackets. Some examples:

1. Negotiation research spans many disciplines [3].

2. This result was later contradicted by Becker and Seligman [5].

3. This effect has been widely studied [1-3, 7].


Reference list

The list of references should only include works that are cited in the text and that have been published or accepted for publication. Personal communications and unpublished works should only be mentioned in the text.

The entries in the list should be numbered consecutively.

If available, please always include DOIs as full DOI links in your reference list (e.g. “https://doi.org/abc”).


Reference to a journal publication:

[1]      Gamelin FX, Baquet G, Berthoin S, Thevenet D, Nourry C, Nottin S, Bosquet L (2009) Effect of high intensity intermittent training on heart rate variability in prepubescent children. Eur J Appl Physiol 105:731-738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-008-0955-8

Ideally, the names of all authors should be provided, but the usage of “et al” in long author lists will also be accepted:

[2]      Smith J, Jones M Jr, Houghton L et al (1999) Future of health insurance. N Engl J Med 965:325–329

Article by DOI:

[3]      Slifka MK, Whitton JL (2000) Clinical implications of dysregulated cytokine production. J Mol Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001090000086

Reference to an edited book: 

[4]      South J, Blass B (2001) The future of modern genomics. Blackwell, London

Reference to a chapter in an edited book:

[5]     Brown B, Aaron M (2001) The politics of nature. In: Smith J (ed) The rise of modern genomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 230-257

Reference to thesis as published: 

[6]     Trent JW (1975) Experimental acute renal failure. Dissertation, University of California

Reference to presentation presented in a congress:

[7]     Caratelli D, Viganó MC, Toso G, Angeletti P (2010) Analytical placement technique for sparse arrays. 32nd ESA Antenna Workshop, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, Oct. 5–8.

[8]     Arrillaga  J, Giessner B (1990) Limitation of short-circuit levels by means of HVDC links. IEEE Summer Power Meeting, Los Angeles, CA, USA, Jul. 12–17, Bildiri 70 CP 637.

Reference to a standard or patent:

[9]      Schulze R (1980) Process for the Isolation of Noble Metals. US Patent 4, 925, 485

[10]    Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (1998). 20th Edition, American Public Health Association, Washington DC, USA

Reference to a website: 

[11]    Cartwright J (2007) Big stars have weather too. IOP Publishing PhysicsWeb. http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/11/6/16/1. Accessed 26 June 2007


Journal titles should be abbreviated with regard to WEB page, as follows:

http://woodward.library.ubc.ca/research-help/journal-abbreviations/

APPENDICES

If there is one appendix, it should be identified as APPENDIX A. If there is more than one appendix, they should be identified as APPENDIX A, B, C etc. In appendices, formulas and equations should be numbered as A1, A2, A3 etc. and, tables and figures should be numbered as Table A1, Table A2, Figure A1, Figure A2 etc.

Additing and Numbering of Equations: Equations should be given as Eq. 1, Eq. 2 etc in text. Equations should be numbered in parentheses as (1), (2), (3) etc. and, reaction numbers as (R1), (R2), (R3) etc. Formulas should be written using Mathtype or the Microsoft equation editor.

Units: SI unit system should be used in the text, figures and tables. For example, "min" should be used instead of "minute", "h" units should be used instead of "hour"

Footnotes: Footnotes should be avoided as much as possible, but if necessary, they should be written at the bottom of the page and this section should be separated by a line from the main text.

Tables: Table captions should be placed at the top of the related table and should be written with TNR font in 8 size. Vertical lines should not be used in tables. Variables should be written as Bold font. If any, units should be in italics and shown in parentheses one line below.  

Figures: Figures should be uploaded in JPEG or TIFF format. Figure captions should be at the bottom of the related figure,  should be written using TNR font in 8 size. Figures should be numbered by considering in which main section they are presented. Figures should be placed in main text. The resolution of the figures must be at least 300 DPI.  If necessary, inset figures can be used. For figure notes, the font should be TNR, Arial or Symbol. The  font size of  the notes should not be larger than 10 size. Please avoid using outer border. 


3. Article Submission

1. Authors must upload their articles by considering Template in online submission system http://jiens.org . It should be ensured that all the authors' information is correct. In further, any changing on this information cannot be done for the article.

2. All manuscripts are subject to peer review for compliance and similarity with the editorial guide as soon as they reach the editorial office. The similarity report must be uploaded to the online system by the authors through the process of uploading their articles. The similarity rate should be below 20%. Studies should be created with regard to Article Template and with. Authors who do not receive such approval within a reasonable period of time should notify the editor.

3.  Authors acknowledge that the copyright of their submitted articles has been transferred to the publisher. A letter stating that the “Submitted article has not been published elsewhere or has not been sent to another journal for publication” should be uploaded to the system as an additional document. All authors in the article must sign the Copyright Form stating that they have given the publication rights of their work to the International Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences. Even if the publication is accepted without submitting this form, it will not be published.

Ethics in Research & Publication

The journal is committed to maintaining the highest level of integrity in the content published. The manuscripts are required to comply with national and international ethic rules for publishing. Authors must pay attention to ICMJE (International Committee of Medcial Journal Editors) recommendations and COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines, namely “International Standards for Editors and Authors”.  

Importantly, both researchers and authors, as well as referees and editors, must comply with certain ethical rules during evaluation process since new ideas and studies include unpublished methods and algorithms. In the Journal of Innovative Engineering and Natural Science (JIENS), authors, reviewers and editors must comply with the following responsibilities:


Ethical responsibilities of authors

Submitted works should not have been published elsewhere and the manuscript and the manuscript should not be submitted to more than one publication for simultaneous consideration. Authors submit their articles to JIENS with a template provided by the journal. The ethical responsibilities of the author(s) who submit articles for publication to this journal are listed below:

         1. Truthfulness and honesty: One of the fundamental ethical responsibilities of authors is to be truthful and honest in their writings. They should not distort information or data, either unintentionally or intentionally, and should avoid misleading readers.
        2. Proper citation of sources: Authors should accurately cite the information, quotes, or data they use in their texts. When using another person's ideas, statements, or works, they should provide proper attribution and citations.
        3. Disclosure of conflicts of interest: Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest in their writings and clearly state them. For example, if they are writing a review about a product or service and have a connection with the manufacturer of that product, they should disclose this conflict to their readers.
        4. Social and cultural sensitivity: Authors should demonstrate social and cultural awareness in their writings. They should avoid demeaning, discriminatory, or offensive language and steer clear of content that could hurt or offend individuals.
        5. Respect for privacy: Authors should respect the privacy and confidentiality of others. They should not access private information without permission or publish such information. They should protect people's privacy rights and personal data.
        6. Prevention of plagiarism: Authors should not copy or plagiarize other people's works. When using someone else's text, ideas, or opinions, they should appropriately quote and attribute the source. Plagiarism is considered a serious ethical violation in the academic and scientific community.
        7. Research ethics: Academic authors should adhere to ethical rules in their research. They should maintain research integrity, comply with ethical standards regarding human and animal subjects, and honestly evaluate research findings. Manipulation of data or presenting results in a misleading manner should be avoided.
        8. Respect for human rights: Authors should respect human rights. They should prepare their writings in line with fundamental human rights values such as freedom, justice, equality, and human dignity.
        9. Managing conflicts of interest: Authors should manage any conflicts of interest and inform relevant parties. For instance, in cases where sponsorship agreements or commercial relationships could influence their writings, they should disclose these conflicts to their readers.
        10. Open communication: Authors should establish open and transparent communication with their readers. They should be open to feedback, respond to questions, and make efforts to correct any possible errors.
        11. Compliance with ethical publishing standards: Authors should adhere to the ethical publishing standards of the platform or journal they are submitting to. They should respect editorial policies and publication guidelines.
        12. Prevention of plagiarism: Authors should check their texts for plagiarism and copyright infringements. They should use plagiarism detection tools (IThenticate) to examine their texts and safeguard the intellectual property rights of others.


Ethical responsibilities of referees

The referees who will evaluate the articles submitted to this journal for publication should observe the ethical responsibilities listed below:

        1. Confidentiality: Referees must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts they review. They should not disclose or use the content or findings of the manuscript for personal gain or to benefit others.
        2. Competence: Referees should possess expertise and knowledge in their respective fields. They should be able to provide informed judgments and evaluate the scientific quality of the manuscripts.
        3. Objectivity: Referees should evaluate manuscripts objectively, without relying on personal biases, opinions, or previous works. Their focus should be solely on the quality and scientific rigor of the manuscript.
        4. Ethical responsibility: Referees should identify potential ethical violations in the manuscripts they review and take appropriate actions. They should report any instances of plagiarism, data manipulation, or copyright infringement.
        5. Constructive criticism: Referees should provide constructive criticism to identify any deficiencies or errors in the manuscript. They should offer feedback in a constructive manner that helps authors improve their work.
        6. Timely response: Referees should strive to evaluate manuscripts in a timely and efficient manner. If they are unable to complete the review within the given timeframe, they should communicate this to the relevant parties.
        7. Avoidance of disclosure: Referees should refrain from sharing information about the manuscripts they review with others. They should not disclose the content or findings of the manuscript in conferences, seminars, or other platforms.
        8. Citation of relevant work: Referees should appropriately reference and acknowledge the authors' previous work in the manuscripts they review. They should respect the authors' previous contributions by citing relevant references and accurately assessing the context and contributionscof those works.
        9. Effective communication: Referees should maintain a respectful and constructive attitude when communicating with authors or editors. In cases of any issues or disagreements related to the review process, they should keep communication channels open and encourage effective communication between parties.
        10. Data privacy: Referees should protect the confidentiality of the data presented in the manuscripts. They should not share or use the data presented in the manuscript for their own purposes.
        11. Continuity and currency: Referees should actively participate in the evaluation process and provide timely feedback on requested revisions or corrections. Additionally, they should stay updated with developments in their fields and make assessments based on current knowledge.
        12. Compliance with ethical publishing standards: Referees should observe whether the manuscripts they review adhere to the ethical publishing standards of the publishing journal or platform. They should assess the compliance with these standards and prevent the publication of unethical practices.
        13. Responsibility and reliability: Referees should approach their assigned tasks with responsibility. They should thoroughly examine the manuscript, make accurate and reliable evaluations, and provide unbiased judgments.
        14. Professional development: Referees should prioritize continuous professional development and stay updated with advancements in their fields. By keeping their knowledge and skills up to date, they contribute to the evaluation process.


Ethical responsibilities of editors

The editors who will evaluate the articles submitted to this journal for publication should observe the ethical responsibilities listed below:

         1. Neutrality: Editors should remain neutral and make objective decisions throughout the publication process. In case of any personal, commercial, or ideological conflicts of interest, they should disclose these conflicts and take necessary measures.
        2. Compliance with principles and ethical rules: Editors should ensure that the articles to be published adhere to ethical publishing principles. They should identify unethical practices such as plagiarism, data manipulation, and copyright infringement, and prevent the publication of such works.
        3. Transparency of publication policies: Editors should clearly define publication policies and communicate them to authors, reviewers, and readers. Publication policies should ensure fair, transparent, and consistent processes.
        4. Confidentiality: Editors should maintain the confidentiality of information during the review process and protect the data related to the articles. They should not disclose or use information about unpublished articles' content or results.
        5. Management of conflicts of interest: Editors should manage conflicts of interest during the publication process and ensure unbiased decision-making. They should disclose their own conflicts of interest or connections and, if necessary, transfer the responsibility to another editor or reviewer.
        6. Peer reviewer selection: Editors should demonstrate impartiality and competence in selecting appropriate reviewers. They should assess the reviewers' expertise, scientific reputation, and experience in relevant fields.
        7. Constructive criticism: Editors should provide constructive criticism during the evaluation and editing process of articles. They should identify deficiencies and improvement opportunities that help authors enhance their articles.
        8. Provision of relevant information: Editors should provide authors and reviewers with necessary information regarding the articles. They should facilitate the required communication to ensure a fair and transparent process.
        9. Preservation of reputation: Editors should strive to maintain the quality and scientific reputation of published articles. They should identify unethical practices, evaluate the compliance of articles with scientific standards, and take corrective measures when necessary.
        10. Disclosure of conflicts of interest: Editors should disclose any conflicts of interest during the publication process. For example, if an editor has authorship relationships or competitive interests, they should inform the relevant parties and take appropriate measures according to guidelines.
        11. Article rejection and retraction: Editors can appropriately reject or retract unpublished or published articles. For instance, in cases of ethical violations, data manipulation, or non-compliance with publication policies, they can retract or reject articles.
        12. Effective communication: Editors should establish effective communication with authors, reviewers, and other relevant parties. They should provide feedback in an open and constructive manner, address inquiries about the process, and demonstrate a solution-oriented approach in case of any issues or disputes.
        13. Information security: Editors should ensure the security of information during the publication process. They should limit access to articles, implement data protection measures, and take necessary steps in case of data breaches.
        14. Plagiarism detection: Editors should check for plagiarism in the articles to be published and detect such cases. They should report plagiarism cases and ensure correction before publication.
        15. Access to current information: Editors should stay updated with developments in their fields and have access to current information. This includes considering the latest research findings and methods during the evaluation process and updating publication policies.
        16. Professional development: Editors should prioritize continuous professional development and stay updated with innovations in publishing. They should participate in training programs to enhance their editorial skills, learn best practices in the industry, and follow current editorial guidelines.
        17. Publication ethics education: Editors should organize educational programs to inform authors, reviewers, and other participants in the publication process about publication ethics. Educational programs addressing ethical issues can help encourage researchers to adhere to ethical standards.
        18. Plagiarism prevention: Editors should employ effective methods to prevent plagiarism. They should use plagiarism detection software to check articles and take necessary measures when potential plagiarism cases are identified.
        19. Honesty and Reliability: Editors should be honest and reliable throughout the publication process. They should keep the information of authors and reviewers confidential and inspire trust within the scientific community.
        20. Speed of the Evaluation Process: Editors should promptly assess articles and ensure a fast publication process. By conducting fair and effective evaluations, they should enhance the efficiency of the publication process.
        21. Good Management: Editors should effectively manage the publication process and regularly monitor all steps involved. They should keep communication channels open, promote collaboration among parties, and provide explanations for their decisions when necessary.
        22. Equality and Diversity: Editors should prioritize equality and diversity principles in the publication process, ensuring equal opportunities and fair evaluations for everyone. Discrimination and bias should not be tolerated.
        23. Reader Satisfaction: Editors should ensure the publication of articles that meet the readers' needs and expectations. By valuing high-quality and engaging content, they should enhance reader satisfaction. Editors should consider readers' feedback and shape publication policies, content selection, and presentation accordingly.
        24. Addressing Ethical Issues: Editors should effectively address ethical issues that may arise during the publication process. They should identify unethical behavior, conduct necessary investigations and corrective actions, process complaints, and safeguard the rights of all parties involved.
        25. Societal Impact: Editors should strive to ensure that published articles have a positive impact on society. Particularly, they should carefully select content to prevent misinformation, discrimination, or the dissemination of harmful content.
        26. Honesty and Transparency: Editors should manage their processes and decisions with honesty and transparency. They should provide clear and understandable information regarding publication policies, the status of unpublished articles, the evaluation process, and other relevant matters.
        27. Authorship and Publishing Ethics Education: Editors should regularly organize training sessions on publishing ethics for authors and participants in the publication process. These training sessions raise awareness to encourage authors to adhere to ethical standards and prevent unethical practices.
        28. Communication and Collaboration: Editors should promote effective communication and create a collaborative environment among authors, reviewers, and other relevant parties. Mutual respect, understanding, and collaboration support the healthy functioning of ethical publishing processes.
        29. Reliable Sources and Data: Editors should make efforts to ensure the reliability of sources and data used in published articles. They should carefully evaluate compliance with accuracy, validity, and reliability standards and prevent the publication of false or misleading information. Additionally, they should encourage data sharing and open access principles.
        30. Appeals Process: Editors should provide an appeals process for authors and reviewers. Authors should have the opportunity to challenge criticisms and rejection decisions for their articles and respond openly to reviewers' evaluations. The appeals process should be fair and transparent.
        31. Responsible publishing: Editors should adopt a responsible approach throughout the publication process. They should make publication decisions while considering scientific ethics, social impact, environmental impact, and other responsibilities. They should carefully select content to minimize potential harmful effects.
        32. Innovation and originality: Editors should encourage the publication of innovative and original research. They should conduct a careful evaluation to prevent similar or duplicate studies and consider compliance with standards of originality.
        33. Social and environmental responsibility: Editors should fulfill their social and environmental responsibilities during the publication process. For example, they should adopt environmentally friendly publishing practices to reduce paper consumption, support community service initiatives, and prioritize works reflecting principles of social justice.
        34. Correction and retraction policies: Editors should manage errors, deficiencies, or ethical violations identified in published articles according to correction and retraction policies. They should effectively implement these policies to ensure that readers have access to accurate and up-to-date information.
        35. Informing about authorship and copyright: Editors should provide guidance to authors on publication ethics and copyright issues. They should clearly communicate authorship principles, author order, recognition of contributors, and copyright guidelines for published works. Additionally, they should emphasize the importance of avoiding plagiarism and appropriately citing others' works.
        36. Editorial independence: Editors should adhere to principles of independence and neutrality throughout the publication process. They should not allow their financial, ideological, or personal interests to influence publication decisions. Editorial decisions should be based solely on scientific merits and publication policies.
        37. Scientific integrity: Editors bear responsibility for maintaining scientific integrity and preventing scientific misconduct, data manipulation, or other unethical practices. They should identify such situations, conduct necessary investigations, and take appropriate corrective measures.
        38. Peer reviewer selection: Editors should choose and assign suitable and qualified peer reviewers. They should ensure that reviewers are experts in their respective fields, capable of providing unbiased, objective, and ethical evaluations. Preventing conflicts of interest and promoting diversity are important in the reviewer selection process.
        39. Confidentiality and data protection: Editors should ensure the confidentiality and data protection of information throughout the publication process. They should keep unpublished manuscripts confidential, safeguard the information of reviewers and other participants, and implement data security measures.
        40. Updating publication policies: Editors should regularly review and update publication policies. They should keep their policies up to date by considering changing needs and best practices in publication ethics, open access, data sharing, and other important topics.

Publication Policy
-JIENS is a peer-reviewed journal published electronically twice a year (January, July). The journal accepts original research articles, postgraduate thesis papers, review articles, and editor letters written in Turkish or English language.

-Manuscripts submitted to JIENS for evaluation must not have been published elsewhere or be under consideration for publication elsewhere. Manuscripts submitted for evaluation should be prepared using the template provided in the journal article writing format. There is no page limit for the manuscripts. The abstract of the article should contain a minimum of 100 and a maximum of 250 words, and the number of keywords should be between 3 and 8.

-Manuscripts submitted for publication in JIENS are expected to comply with the journal writing rules, present new knowledge, propose a new method, or provide a new perspective to existing knowledge. The results of the research presented in the manuscripts should be clearly and honestly presented without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. Authors should provide references for all the citations used in their manuscripts, and references should be listed at the end of the manuscript following the writing rules. For studies requiring ethics committee approval, the ethics committee report should be included during the manuscript submission.

-All authors share equal responsibility regarding ethical principles. The copyright transfer form, in which all authors approve their responsibilities related to the publication, must be uploaded to the system with wet signatures of all authors. A similarity check is performed for all publications during the preliminary control stage. Publications with a similarity rate of more than 20% are not evaluated.

-The author can withdraw their article until the referee is invited. In the interest of objective publishing, our journal applies a blind peer review system, and the manuscripts are published after being evaluated by at least two referees. It is expected that the referees evaluate the manuscripts within 15 days of receipt. In case this period is exceeded, the editors assign new referees and withdraw the request from the previous referee.

-After the referee evaluation, the decision of acceptance or rejection of the manuscript is made by the editors. Manuscripts that are deemed insufficient based on the referee recommendations receive either a major revision (resubmission for evaluation) or a minor revision (corrections required) decision. After the "resubmission for evaluation" or "corrections required" decision is given for the manuscript, the necessary changes are expected to be made by the author within 30 days for the "resubmission for evaluation" decision and 20 days for the "corrections required" decision. Otherwise, the manuscript will be rejected. Manuscripts that are reuploaded after corrections but still deemed insufficient from a scientific perspective will be rejected.

-After publication, discussions and corrections made by authors or readers regarding the articles are done by submitting 'letters to the editor' and 'correction' files through the article submission section. Following the editor's review, if there are issues requiring additional evaluation, referees are appointed, and the process is completed with support from different institutions and organizations. The files containing discussions and corrections made after the process are published under the title of 'correction article' in the next issue. When the Editorial Board receives a request from the author(s) to withdraw a manuscript during the evaluation process, they respond in writing to the author(s) within 10 days at the latest after a brief review. If there are suspicions of copyright infringement, ethical violations, or plagiarism in the early appearance or published electronic version of a manuscript during the evaluation process, the Journal's Editorial Board is obligated to initiate an urgent investigation. Upon investigation, if the Editorial Board determines that a manuscript in the evaluation stage violates ethical principles, contains plagiarism, or does not comply with copyright regulations, they withdraw the manuscript. The Editorial Board decision, including the reasons regarding the manuscript, is communicated to the author(s). If the Editorial Board determines that an early appearance or electronically published manuscript violates ethical principles, contains plagiarism, or does not comply with copyright regulations, they promptly notify the decision, along with the evidence, to the author(s), the authors' institutions, the relevant Institute if the article is part of a thesis, and other organizations if applicable, in writing.

-Our journal operates on an open-access system. Published articles in the journal are freely accessible. No fees are charged to authors for manuscript submission or publication.

-Each issue can include a maximum of "40" articles. Manuscripts will be published in the order of acceptance. Accepted articles will be assigned DOI numbers.