Royal Scientific Publishing LLC is committed to maintaining a rigorous, transparent, ethical, and academically independent editorial process for scholarly books, edited volumes, research monographs, textbooks, reference works, and peer-reviewed book chapters.

Our Editorial Policy establishes the principles and procedures governing editorial assessment, peer review, editorial decision-making, author responsibilities, conflicts of interest, research integrity, corrections, and publication standards.

1. Purpose of the Editorial Policy

The purpose of this policy is to ensure that publications released by Royal Scientific Publishing LLC meet appropriate standards of:

Academic quality
Originality
Scholarly relevance
Research integrity
Editorial independence
Peer-review rigor
Professional presentation
Ethical conduct
Transparency

The policy applies to authors, editors, series editors, reviewers, editorial board members, and other individuals involved in the publication process.

2. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently based on the scholarly and academic merits of a submission.

Editors should not allow commercial, financial, personal, institutional, political, or other inappropriate considerations to influence editorial decisions.

Editorial decisions may consider:

Originality
Scholarly contribution
Relevance to the publication's scope
Methodological quality
Technical accuracy
Clarity and organization
Quality of references
Ethical compliance
Suitability for the intended readership

3. Editorial Scope

Royal Scientific Publishing LLC considers scholarly publications across a broad range of disciplines, including:

Computer Science and Information Technology
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
Cybersecurity
Data Science and Big Data
Cloud and Distributed Computing
Engineering and Technology
Physics
Chemistry
Biology and Biotechnology
Mathematics
Environmental Sciences
Healthcare and Medical Sciences
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Business and Management
Economics
Education
Social Sciences
Humanities
Interdisciplinary Research

Individual books and series may have more specific subject scopes.

4. Book Proposal Evaluation

Book proposals are initially evaluated by the editorial team.

The evaluation may consider:

Proposed title
Scope and objectives
Originality
Academic contribution
Intended audience
Author/editor qualifications
Table of contents
Proposed chapter structure
Research significance
Market and academic relevance
Competing publications
Proposed length
References and supporting literature
Ethical and legal considerations

Submission of a proposal does not constitute acceptance for publication.

5. Editorial Screening

Before peer review, submitted manuscripts may undergo an initial editorial screening.

The screening may evaluate:

Compliance with submission guidelines
Relevance to the publication scope
Basic scholarly quality
Originality
Appropriate authorship
Ethical requirements
Completeness of the manuscript
Potential plagiarism or inappropriate text reuse
Conflicts of interest
Legal and copyright concerns

A submission may be declined at this stage if it is outside the publisher's scope or does not meet the minimum requirements for further consideration.

6. Peer Review Policy

Publications designated as peer-reviewed undergo an appropriate peer-review process.

Depending on the publication, Royal Scientific Publishing LLC may use:

Single-blind peer review
Double-blind peer review
Open peer review
Editorial review
Expert assessment

The applicable review process will be communicated to authors and reviewers.

Peer review is intended to evaluate:

Scientific or scholarly validity
Originality
Methodological soundness
Contribution to the field
Quality of analysis
Clarity
Appropriate use of references
Accuracy and completeness

7. Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are selected based on appropriate expertise and experience.

Editors may consider:

Academic qualifications
Research specialization
Publication record
Professional expertise
Subject knowledge
Previous reviewing experience

Individuals with significant conflicts of interest should not be selected to review a submission.

8. Reviewer Confidentiality

Reviewers must maintain confidentiality regarding unpublished manuscripts and related materials.

Reviewers should not:

Share manuscripts with unauthorized individuals
Use unpublished information for personal advantage
Disclose confidential review discussions
Contact authors directly regarding confidential editorial matters unless authorized

9. Editorial Decisions

Following editorial assessment and, where applicable, peer review, the editor may make one of the following decisions:

Accept

The manuscript is suitable for publication with no substantial further revision required.

Minor Revision

The manuscript requires limited changes before publication.

Major Revision

Substantial revisions are required and the revised manuscript may undergo additional review.

Resubmit

The manuscript requires significant changes before it can be reconsidered.

Reject

The manuscript does not meet the publication's scholarly, editorial, ethical, or scope requirements.

The final decision remains the responsibility of the designated editor.

10. Editorial Responsibility

Editors are responsible for ensuring that editorial decisions are:

Fair
Consistent
Evidence-based
Professionally communicated
Independent
Consistent with the applicable publication policy

Editors should not discriminate against authors based on personal characteristics, nationality, institutional affiliation, geographic location, or other irrelevant factors.

11. Author Responsibilities

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submitted work:

Is substantially original
Is accurately presented
Properly acknowledges sources
Contains accurate references
Does not contain fabricated or falsified information
Complies with applicable research ethics requirements
Includes appropriate authorship
Discloses relevant conflicts of interest
Obtains necessary permissions
Complies with applicable copyright requirements

Authors must respond appropriately to legitimate editorial and reviewer requests.

12. Authorship and Contribution

Authorship should accurately reflect significant intellectual contributions to the work.

All listed authors should:

Have made an appropriate contribution
Approve the submitted manuscript
Approve the final version
Accept responsibility for their contribution

Honorary, guest, or gift authorship is discouraged.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria may be acknowledged where appropriate.

13. Changes in Authorship

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission should be supported by an appropriate explanation and agreement from the affected authors.

The editor may request additional documentation before approving an authorship change.

14. Conflicts of Interest

Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose relevant conflicts of interest.

Potential conflicts may include:

Financial relationships
Employment relationships
Institutional relationships
Personal relationships
Professional competition
Collaborative relationships
Supervisory relationships

Where a conflict could compromise impartiality, the individual may be removed from the relevant editorial or review process.

15. Research Integrity

Royal Scientific Publishing LLC expects authors to follow recognized standards of responsible research.

The publisher does not tolerate:

Fabrication
Falsification
Plagiarism
Duplicate publication
Manipulation of research results
Citation manipulation
Misrepresentation of data
Unethical authorship practices
Unauthorized use of confidential information

Concerns may be investigated and appropriate action may be taken.

16. Plagiarism and Similarity

Submitted manuscripts may be evaluated using appropriate plagiarism and similarity-detection procedures.

Similarity results are not automatically treated as evidence of misconduct. Editors may evaluate the context, source, quotation, citation, and extent of overlap.

Where inappropriate copying or substantial unattributed material is identified, the publisher may:

Request clarification
Require revision
Reject the submission
Initiate an appropriate research-integrity investigation
Issue a post-publication correction or retraction when necessary

17. Artificial Intelligence and Editorial Assessment

Royal Scientific Publishing LLC recognizes that artificial intelligence tools are increasingly used in scholarly research and manuscript preparation.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and legality of all submitted content.

AI tools should not be credited as authors.

Where AI has made a substantive contribution to a manuscript, authors may be required to disclose its use according to the relevant publication's guidelines.

Editors and reviewers should also use AI tools responsibly and must not upload confidential unpublished manuscripts to external AI systems where doing so would compromise confidentiality or intellectual property.

18. Ethical Research

Authors must comply with applicable ethical standards when research involves:

Human participants
Animals
Clinical information
Personal data
Sensitive information
Biological materials
Other regulated research activities

Where applicable, authors should provide information regarding:

Ethics committee approval
Institutional review board approval
Informed consent
Participant confidentiality
Animal welfare approval
Data protection procedures

19. Copyright and Permissions

Authors are responsible for obtaining necessary permissions for copyrighted third-party material.

This may include:

Images
Figures
Tables
Photographs
Maps
Extended quotations
Previously published content
Proprietary datasets

The publisher may request documentation demonstrating permission to reproduce such material.

20. Editorial Board

The Editorial Board provides academic and strategic guidance to the publisher and may assist with:

Developing publication programs
Reviewing proposals
Recommending reviewers
Supporting peer-review processes
Establishing subject priorities
Maintaining scholarly standards
Advising on emerging research areas
Promoting research integrity

Editorial Board membership does not automatically imply acceptance or publication of submissions associated with a board member.

21. Special Issues, Edited Volumes, and Book Series

Special collections, edited volumes, and book series must follow appropriate editorial and peer-review procedures.

Guest editors and volume editors are expected to:

Apply consistent evaluation criteria
Manage conflicts of interest
Select qualified reviewers
Maintain confidentiality
Ensure appropriate authorship
Avoid preferential treatment
Ensure that accepted content meets the stated scope and quality requirements

22. Appeals and Reconsideration

Authors may request reconsideration of an editorial decision when they believe that:

A significant factual error occurred
Relevant information was overlooked
A reviewer conflict of interest may have affected the process
The decision was inconsistent with the stated editorial policy

An appeal should provide a clear explanation and supporting evidence.

An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.

23. Corrections and Post-Publication Updates

Royal Scientific Publishing LLC recognizes the importance of maintaining an accurate scholarly record.

When an error is identified after publication, appropriate action may include:

Correction
Erratum
Corrigendum
Updated version
Editorial notice
Expression of concern

The appropriate action will depend on the nature and significance of the issue.

24. Retractions

A publication may be considered for retraction where there is credible evidence of serious problems such as:

Fabricated or falsified research
Significant plagiarism
Major ethical violations
Serious methodological errors
Duplicate publication
Unreliable findings
Material violations of publication policies

Retraction decisions are intended to correct the scholarly record and will be handled as transparently as reasonably possible.

25. Indexing and Discoverability

Royal Scientific Publishing LLC is committed to providing accurate bibliographic metadata and supporting the discoverability of its publications.

Where applicable, publications may receive:

ISBN
DOI
Author identifiers
Structured metadata
Abstracts and keywords
Citation information

Third-party databases and indexing services independently determine eligibility and coverage.

Publication by Royal Scientific Publishing LLC does not guarantee inclusion in Scopus, Web of Science, or any other independent indexing service.

26. Editorial Transparency

Information relating to the publication process should be communicated clearly to authors.

Where applicable, the publisher will provide information regarding:

Submission requirements
Peer-review procedures
Editorial decisions
Revision requirements
Publication agreements
Copyright
Licensing
Open Access
ISBN
DOI
Applicable publication charges
Indexing and discoverability

27. Quality Control and Production

Accepted manuscripts undergo appropriate production procedures, which may include:

Copyediting
Language editing
Reference checking
Formatting
Typesetting
Figure and table checking
Metadata preparation
Proofreading
Final quality control

Authors may be asked to review proofs before final publication.

28. Editorial Policy for Open Access Publications

Open Access publications are subject to the same fundamental standards of editorial quality and research integrity as other publications.

Open Access status does not influence the scholarly assessment of a manuscript.

Where applicable, the publication agreement will specify:

Copyright ownership
License
Author rights
Reuse conditions
Applicable publication charges

29. Publication Fees

If publication, processing, editing, or other charges apply to a particular publication, they should be communicated to authors clearly before the author enters into the relevant publishing agreement.

Payment of a fee does not guarantee acceptance or publication.

Editorial decisions should remain independent of legitimate publication-related commercial arrangements.

30. Policy Review

Royal Scientific Publishing LLC periodically reviews its editorial policies to reflect developments in:

Scholarly publishing
Research integrity
Peer review
Open Access
Digital publishing
Artificial intelligence
Copyright
Metadata
Academic standards

Updated policies may be published on the Royal Scientific Publishing LLC website.

Our Editorial Commitment

Royal Scientific Publishing LLC is committed to maintaining an editorial environment based on academic quality, integrity, fairness, transparency, independence, and responsible scholarly communication.

Our editors, reviewers, authors, and publishing professionals share responsibility for protecting the integrity of the scholarly record and ensuring that published works contribute meaningfully to the advancement and dissemination of knowledge.

Royal Scientific Publishing LLC — Advancing Knowledge Through Responsible Scholarly Publishing.