Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process
The Tikrit Journal for Computer Science and Mathematics (TJCSM) follows a single-blind peer review model, where reviewers remain anonymous while authors’ identities are disclosed. This process ensures impartial evaluation while allowing reviewers to assess the research within the appropriate context.

Editorial Screening
Before sending manuscripts for external review, the editorial board assesses each submission to confirm its relevance, originality, and alignment with the aims and scope of TJCSM. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be desk rejected.

Reviewer Assignment and Evaluation
Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewers evaluate the novelty, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, clarity, and overall contribution of the research. Authors’ identities are known to reviewers, but reviewers remain anonymous to authors throughout the process.

Review Outcomes

• If both reviewers recommend acceptance (with or without revisions), the paper proceeds to the next stage.

• If one reviewer issues a negative recommendation, an additional reviewer may be assigned.

• If two reviewers provide negative feedback, the manuscript is rejected.

• Authors may be required to revise their manuscripts according to reviewers’ comments. Revisions must be submitted within the specified timeframe for re-evaluation.

Manuscript Withdrawal
Authors wishing to withdraw their submission must submit a formal request to the editorial board, along with a valid justification. Withdrawal requests must follow the journal’s ethical guidelines to avoid unnecessary disruption to the editorial workflow. Repeated or unethical withdrawal practices may affect consideration of future submissions.

Commitment to Ethical Review
TJCSM is committed to ensuring that the peer review process upholds fairness, transparency, and academic integrity. The editorial board and reviewers strictly adhere to COPE guidelines in handling all manuscripts.