Instructions for Reviewers

| Instructions for Reviewers |


  1. Technical papers: The associated editor selects two referees who have expertise in the area associated with submitted manuscript. If review results from the reviewers split, a third reviewer may be sought. Final recommendation on the manuscript is made by the editorial board.

  2. Discussion: The associate editor reviews the manuscript and makes a decision.

  3. Selection of reviewers: With the recommendation from the editorial board members, the editor-in-chief selects two or three reviewers who will then receive an official review invitation. When selected reviewers do not accept the review invitation, additional reviewers are searched and recommended by the editorial board.

Review consideration

Reviewers determine the suitability and quality level of submitted manuscripts based on the following academic and quality aspects.

1. Academic aspects

(1) Originality of contents

(2) Importance of contents

(3) Propriety of assumption and analysis

(4) Mathematical soundness

(5) Quality level of data

(6) Logicality of explanation

2. Quality Level of manuscript

(1) Is manuscript well-organized?

(2) Is manuscript of appropriate length?

(3) Is manuscript correct in grammar?

(4) Does the title accurately represent the contents?

(5) Does the summary concisely explain the contents?

(6) Does the key terminology represent important matters?

(7) Is the conclusion comprehensive?

(8) Does the reference clearly reflect previous achievements?

(9) Are the figures and tables clear and simple?

Review of manuscript

Reviewers assess submitted manuscripts following the review standard specified in this regulation. Final decision and quality level of manuscript shall be made with the descriptions given as follows:

1. Judgment on appropriateness

(1) Accept in present form: This case applies when the contents, organization, and formation of the manuscript are readily acceptable for the publication without further revision.

(2) Accept with revision: This case applies when the manuscript is publishable with some revision.

(3) Re-review required upon revision: This case applies when a major revision is required.

(4) Decline: This case applies when the manuscript is not appropriate for the publication.

2. Judgment on quality level

(1) Ecellent

(2) Good

(3) Average

(4) Below Average

(5) Poor

Deadline of Review

Reviewers are asked to complete the review of manuscript and send the review result within one month

after the permission of review request. If the editor-in-chief approves, the deadline may be extended.

Process of Review Results

  1. Request for Revision: This case applies when reviewers request a revision of manuscript and authors shall be asked to revise them.

  2. Request of review after Revision: The authors should revise the manuscripts according to the recommendations or comments made by the reviewers with proper responses within 4 weeks.

  3. Publication: When the final decision is made as acceptable, the manuscript is regarded as being approved for the publication.

  4. Returning: When the following cases happen, manuscripts may be returned:

(1) When reviewers decide that manuscripts cannot be published.

(2) When authors do not submit the revised manuscript within 3 months after the review results are notified.


If the authors have any objections to the review results, the authors are allowed to appeal with an official letter of specific reasons for the objection. The editor-in-chief shall discuss the issue with the editorial board.

Submission & Examination Dates of Manuscripts

  1. Detailed dates of review process appear in the printed manuscript when published.

  2. The submission of manuscripts is regarded as completed once manuscript payment is made.


The editorial board may discuss about any necessary issue on regulation and publication procedure for the journal.