• A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
• The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
• Submitting the same manuscript to more than one publication concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
• Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported work.
• All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

2. Obligations of Reviewers

• All submitted papers are subject to double-blind review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the paper.
• The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, significance, originality, readability and language.
• The possible decisions include acceptance or rejection.
• Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
• Articles may be rejected without review if they are obviously not suitable for publication.
• The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
• 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.
• The staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
• Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
• Manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents and are reviewed by anonymous staff.
• A reviewer should also call to the publisher's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.