[MGV logo]   Publication ethics

Machine Graphics & Vision accepts and implements the rules of publishing ethics according to the Best Practice Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The fundamental rules of ethics concerning the processes of reviewing, editorial requirements, quality assurance and counteracting the phenomena of ghostwriting and guest authorship (honorary authorship) in Machine Graphics & Vision are as follows.

  1. The Editors treat the phenomena of ghostwriting and guest authorship as a sign of scientific dishonesty, and all the discovered cases are exposed, including the notifying of the relevant entities (employers of the authors). Submitting a declaration signed by the authors that the phenomena of ghostwriting and guest authorship are absent in the publication is a condition for it being published.
  2. For assessing each publication two independent reviewers are appointed, while at least one of them is not employed in the Department of Informatics, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (Katedra Informatyki SGGW).
  3. As a model solution it is accepted that the autor(s) and reviewer(s) do not know their identities (double-blind review proces).
  4. In the case of doubts the reviewer must sign a declaration of no conflict of interest. As a case of conflict of interest the following relations between an author and a reviewer are uderstood:
    • direct personal relation (kinship, legal relations, conflict);
    • professional dependence;
    • direct scientific cooperation during the last two years before the review is prepared.
  5. In the case one review is positive and one is negative, the publication is subjected to a third independent review.
  6. The review is prepared in writing and is concluded with a univocal conclusion that a paper is accepted for publication or rejected.
  7. In the case the paper is accepted for publication after substantial changes or complementing it is subjected to a third review.
  8. The rules of review and the review form are are made publicly known in the web page of the journal
  9. The names of the reviewers of the specific papers are not disclosed; once per year the journal announces the list of names of its cooperating reviewers*.

The policy concerning the originality and copyright of publications is as follows.

  1. MG&V accepts only original, previously unpublished material. Submission of a paper for publication in MG&V is taken to imply that the paper was not previously published, and neither is being considered for publication or is being submitted for publication elsewhere. In the case of the previously published conference proceedings, the publication is admitted providing that
  2. It is taken to imply that permission for publication, if needed, has been granted by the appropriate sources. If the manuscript contains any "copyrighted material" the task of obtaining the necessary permissions from the copyright owner(s) is the author(s)'s responsibility.
  3. The author actually submitting the manuscript must enclose a note (cover letter) saying that the paper is submitted together with the listed co-authors. Such note is taken to imply that the submitting author has obtained their consent for submitting the paper. One of the authors (e.g., the submitting one) should be indicated as the contact person. Otherwise, all correspondence will be sent to the author who sent the submission or in case of ambiguity to the author listed as the first one.
  4. The paper submitted for consideration should not contain the authors' names, affiliations and addresses, as well as possible thanks and information about funding. These information items should be placed on a separate page, and the text proper should not contain any such elements, also in page headers or footers. If the references could reveal the identity of the author(s), they should be anonymized. If the author(s) fail to do exclude the dentifyinf information in the paper, the Editors can do this without noticing the author(s) or can ask the corresponding author to do so.


* In case the number of papers in a year is small enough to make it possible for the readers to relate specific reviewers to the specific papers, which would compromise the double blind review rule, the list of reviewers is published after a larger number of papers is published.


Maintained by Leszek Chmielewski <MGV@sggw.pl>
Last updated October 10, 2018