This publication is a member of the International Committee on Ethics in Publication (COPE) and is committed to adhering to its principles.
Link (COPE)
The Charter of Ethics Journal of Applied and Computational Sciences is designed based on guidelines provided by the Publication Ethics Committee (COPE) and all users are expected to adhere to these ethics. Any plagiarism or other immoral behavior will result in the removal of the article from the arbitration process. This charter is designed to determine the duties and responsibilities of authors, editors, editorial board members, and judges.
Definitions
1. Forging: Producing unreal data or giving unreal reports or writing unreal facts.
2. Deceiving: changing data, deleting, adjusting or adding to data in such a way that the presented material seems to be novel or a specific theorem seems to be correct or incorrect. Deceiving can be intentional changes in equipment or in the process of testing in such a way that a specific theorem seems to be correct or incorrect.
3. Cheating: using written research data or results of others with no permission or with no mentioning of a used scientific software, program, test equipment of others while doing research with them.
4. Copying: using significant or effective parts of a manuscript or translation of a paper or a document that has already been published in such a way that claims originality is considered copying. This also could be if part of a paper, even with proper referencing is selected without rewording it or not showing it in quotations.
Unethical research behavior
a) Definition
If in a paper one of the cases of forging, deceiving, cheating or copying takes place then an unethical research behavior has happened.
b) Note
1- The author list must be limited to whom having an effective share in the creation of the work, therefore not quoting names of people who have had an effective share is an example of unethical behavior.
2- Replacing or deleting the name of one or more authors from the ones originally claimed in the process of reviewing the paper without any justification can be an example of unethical research behavior.
3- Writing incomplete and incorrect information regarding the authors and adding the names of one or more authors who have had no contribution in creating a paper is also an example of unethical behavior.
Reviewers
1- Using the results of a paper under your names or others is an unethical research behavior.
2- If the reviewers are researching the same subject or related to it then they must notify the journal office and not accept the task of reviewing.
Procedures of encountering unethical research behavior
1- Receiving the written accusation from an organization or a scientific person by editorial office.
2- Reporting the case to the ethical committee of the journal
2-1 A Preliminary investigation of the case is done by the ethical committee, regarding the validation of accusation and if further investigations are necessary or not.
2-2 If necessary, collect and search the documents and prepare a report indicating the accusations are false or true.
2-3 Sending the report to the editor along with suggested punishment in the case of true accusations.
FUM Policy on Using AI and LLMs
In compliance with the position taken by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), in all FUM Press publications, including academic papers, authors may use AI and LLMs tools to prepare initial drafts “in the Materials and Methods (or similar section)” of their manuscript. They may do so transparently, and only if they maintain full accountability and responsibility for the content of their work. Since these tools cannot take responsibility for submitted manuscripts, “AI tools cannot meet the requirements for authorship” at this stage. FUM Press remains strictly committed to the long-established academic standards regarding authorship, plagiarism, transparency, and accountability; authors are thus required to properly document and state their use of AI or LLMs.