1. Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement: The Aryabhatta Journal of Mathematics & Informatics and its Publisher, are members of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This journal follows the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Editors and the Code of Conduct for Publishers. It is expected of authors, reviewers and editors that they follow the best- practice guidelines on ethical behavior contained therein. 

   1. Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

   2. Disclosure and conflicts of interest : Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

   3. Publication decisions : Manuscripts submitted to these journals are evaluated entirely on the basis of their scientific content, Research methodology and findings. All possible measures are taken to uphold the highest standards of publication ethics and to prevent malpractices. Authors who submit papers to our Journals attest that their work is original and unpublished and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In addition, it has not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other works and if the authors have used the works of others the same has been appropriately cited or quoted with reference. The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer- review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

2. Duties of Reviewers : Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavor.

   1. Standards of objectivity : Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

   2. Acknowledgment of sources : Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge

3. Duties of Authors : 

   1. ​Reporting standards : Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

   2. Originality and plagiarism : Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that it has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

   3. Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication : Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

   4. Acknowledgment of sources : Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.

   5. Peer review : Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given. Note: Upon finding of any significant error in the published work, it is the responsibility of the authors to promptly notify the editors and cooperate in the retraction or correction of the paper. In case no reply has been received within specified time, no further changes will be entertained.

4. Ethical/Legal Consideration: Although the editors & referees make every effort to ensure the validity of published work, the final responsibility rests with the author, not with the journal, its chief editor or editors or the publisher. All disputes are subject to Jagadhri/ Yamunanagar (Haryana), India, Jurisdiction only.

​

​