•  
•  

Policies and Ethics

(NSWA) and its editorial board fully adhere to the policies and principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Submission of a manuscript to the journal implies that all authors have read and agreed to its content and that the manuscript conforms to the journal’s policies.

NSWA requires all submissions to adhere to the highest ethical standards and best practices in publishing. All writing and research submitted to NSWA is expected to present accurate information and to properly cite all referenced content from other materials.

Advertisements

The journal does not accept adverts from third parties.

Affiliations

Authors must report their relevant affiliations with the institutions where the research was approved, supported, and/or conducted. For non-research articles, authors should provide their current affiliations. If an author has moved to a different institution before publishing the article, they must report the affiliation where the work was conducted, while also including their current affiliation and contact information in the acknowledgements.

Appeals and Complaints

Appealing a Rejection

If you believe your manuscript was unfairly rejected, you have the right to request a reconsideration. To do so, you must contact the Editor using the contact information provided on the journal’s official website. These requests are handled as formal appeals.
Please be aware that appeals are reviewed only after the completion of regular editorial tasks, so a decision may take several weeks. According to journal policy, each manuscript is allowed only one appeal.

An appeal will be considered under the following circumstances:

• The authors can show that a factual error made by the reviewers or editors influenced the rejection decision.
• New, important data has become available that could significantly affect the evaluation of the manuscript.
• There is a reasonable claim that bias or a conflict of interest may have impacted the review or editorial decision.

To submit an appeal, send a formal letter explaining your reasons to the editorial office at ethics_reporting@sciencesforce.com. Be sure to include your manuscript’s tracking number in the subject line of the email.

Submitting a Complaint

We take all complaints seriously and handle them with care and confidentiality.

If your complaint is related to the editorial process (for example, unusual delays in peer review), the responsible editor will review the situation and respond accordingly. Feedback from such cases is used to help improve editorial procedures.

If your concern involves publication ethics or the integrity of scientific content, the editor will act in accordance with the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

If your complaint directly involves the editor, or if the issue cannot be resolved through normal channels, it will be escalated to the journal’s editorial and publishing management team for further review.

All complaints or ethical concerns should be submitted via email to ethics_reporting@sciencesforce.com.

Authorship

NSWA recognizes the importance of crediting individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to a manuscript. Contributors are considered authors if they have significantly contributed to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. We require detailed information about each contributor’s role in the research for original studies. Prospective authors should follow our guidelines on authorship and contributorship principles to ensure best practices in research and publication.

Authorship Criteria

Authorship credit in Neutrosophic Systems with Applications is granted only to individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to all of the following three components of the research and manuscript preparation:

• Concept and Design of the study, or Acquisition, Analysis, or Interpretation of Data;
• Drafting the Article or Critically Revising It for significant intellectual content;
• Final Approval of the version to be published.

Merely securing funding or collecting data does not meet the criteria for authorship. Similarly, general supervision of the research team, without direct involvement in the key aspects mentioned above, does not qualify an individual for authorship.

Each listed author must have made a meaningful contribution to the work and should be able to publicly take responsibility for the content attributed to them.

The order of authorship should reflect each contributor’s relative involvement in the conception, execution, and writing of the manuscript. Once a manuscript is submitted, the authorship order cannot be altered without the written consent of all contributors.

The journal also sets guidelines on the maximum number of authors per manuscript, depending on the type of article, its scope, and the number of institutions involved. If a submission exceeds the recommended limit, the corresponding author must provide a clear justification for the number of listed authors.

For transparency and ethical publishing, we expect all submissions to comply strictly with these authorship criteria.

Contribution Details

Contributors are encouraged to provide a description of their contributions to the manuscript, organized into the following categories as applicable: concept, design, definition of intellectual content, literature search, data acquisition, data analysis, statistical analysis, manuscript preparation, manuscript editing, and manuscript review. The authors' contributions will be included at the end of the published article in a separate section titled “Author Contributions”.

Acknowledgment

Any individuals who contributed to the article but do not qualify for authorship should be mentioned in the acknowledgement section. In addition, any organization or institution that provided support, whether through funding or other resources, should also be acknowledged. Authors are responsible for notifying and obtaining permission from those they identify in the acknowledgement section.

Citations

Research and non-research articles must cite relevant, timely, and credible literature to support any claims reported in the article. While peer-reviewed sources are generally preferred, non-peer-reviewed materials (such as official reports, websites, datasets, or technical standards) may also be cited where appropriate and reliable.

Authors must avoid excessive self-citation and must not engage in citation manipulation practices, including prearranged agreements among authors or coercive citation requests, intended to inappropriately increase citation metrics. Such practices are considered a form of publication misconduct and will be handled in accordance with the COPE guidance on citation manipulation.

Authors of non-research articles should ensure that citations are relevant and appropriate to the article type. Review articles are expected to provide a comprehensive and balanced overview of existing literature, while opinion or perspective pieces should cite key references that support the author's arguments, ensuring relevance without requiring exhaustive coverage of all related research.

Confidentiality

When submitting manuscripts for review, authors trust editors with their work. It is important to respect the confidentiality of both authors and reviewers, as disclosing confidential information can violate authors’ rights and impact their careers. Editors must not share any details about the manuscripts, such as content, status, or reviewer comments, except with the authors and reviewers. Confidentiality may only be breached if fraud or dishonesty is suspected. Reviewers and editorial staff must not discuss the work publicly before publication. Reviewers should not make copies of the manuscript, share it, or publish comments without permission. Editors should not retain copies of rejected manuscripts. Confidentiality is essential throughout the review process.

Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests

Authors should avoid entering into agreements with study sponsors, whether for-profit and non-profit, that could interfere with their access to all study data or compromise their ability to analyze, interpret, and publish the results independently.

All authors must disclose any relationships or interests that could inappropriately influence or bias their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include but are not limited to:

• Financial interests (such as employment, consultancies, stocks/shares ownership, honoraria, research grants, paid expert testimonies, and patent-licensing arrangements).
• Non-financial interests (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, or personal beliefs).

Authors must disclose potential conflicts of interest via the online submission system during the submission process. The corresponding author must include a summary statement in the manuscript in a separate section titled “Conflicts of Interest” placed just before the reference list. The statement should reflect all disclosed potential conflict of interest.

Below are examples of disclosures:

• Conflicts of Interest: Author A has received research grants from Company A. Author B has received a speaker honorarium from Company X and owns stocks in Company Y. Author C has been involved as a consultant and expert witness in Company Z. Author D is the inventor of patent X.

If no conflicts of interest exist, authors should state:

• Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Consent for Publication

For all manuscripts that include details or images relating to an individual, written informed consent for the publication must be obtained from the individual (or their parent or legal guardian in the case of children under 18). The consent must specify publication under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, allowing free access online. For deceased individuals, consent must be obtained from their next of kin. The manuscript must include a statement confirming that consent has been obtained.

Copyright Policy

Philosophy of Neutrosophic Systems with Applications

As an open-access journal, Neutrosophic Systems with Applications (NSWA) is dedicated to disseminating high-quality research globally without barriers. This commitment ensures that scholarly work is accessible to all, fostering collaboration and knowledge exchange. For detailed editorial priorities, please refer to our Aims and Scope page.

Who Can Submit?

Anyone may submit an original manuscript to be considered for publication in NSWA as long as they either own the copyright to the work or are authorized by the copyright owner(s) to submit it. Authors retain the copyright to their works after publication in NSWA. An exception may apply if authors are subject to institutional or employment agreements requiring copyright transfer.

Open Access Policy

Neutrosophic Systems with Applications (NSWA), published by Sciences Force LLC, is firmly committed to the principles of open access, ensuring that all published content is freely and immediately available to the global scholarly community.

NSWA adheres to the widely accepted definitions of open access as outlined by the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities. In accordance with these declarations, NSWA defines open access by the following core conditions:

• Peer-reviewed research is made available online without financial, legal, or technical barriers—no subscription or paywall restrictions.
• Content is published immediately in open access format without any embargo period.
• Articles and supplementary materials may be freely used, shared, reproduced, or modified in any medium, provided that proper attribution is given to the original authors and source.

All articles in NSWA are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license enables the broadest possible dissemination and reuse of content, allowing for linking, sharing, text and data mining, and integration into educational, scientific, and technological tools—free of charge and without seeking prior permission, as long as appropriate credit is given.

This open access model aligns with NSWA’s mission to promote interdisciplinary knowledge exchange, support researchers across the globe—including those in under-resourced regions—and accelerate scientific discovery in neutrosophic systems and related fields.

Information regarding article processing charges is provided on the Instructions for Authors page.

Please note: Some submitted content (e.g., figures or tables) in all types of articles may include third-party materials for which NSWA does not hold copyright or licensing rights. In such cases, authors are responsible for securing the necessary permissions from the original copyright holders prior to reuse or publication.

NSWA’s open access policy is reviewed regularly to ensure alignment with evolving global standards and best practices in open scholarly communication.

Copyright and Licensing Note on Published Articles

Copyright and licensing notes are included on the last page of articles published prior to 2025, and for articles published from 2025 onward, they are located on the first page.

Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

Changes to articles after they have been published online may only be made under the circumstances outlined below. Neutrosophic Systems with Applications (NSWA) places great importance on the integrity of articles, and our policy is based on best practices in the academic publishing community.

Corrections: Corrections are issued to address errors identified after publication, whether introduced by the authors or during the production process. Corrections describe the nature of the error, note any impact on the conclusions, and are published as separate notices that are freely accessible and permanently linked to the original article.

Expressions of Concern: An expression of concern may be published when there are credible and unresolved concerns regarding the integrity, validity, or ethical compliance of a published article, and an investigation is ongoing or cannot yet be concluded. This notice serves to inform readers of potential issues while ensuring that due process is followed. Expressions of concern are clearly labeled, freely accessible, and linked to the original article. Further editorial action, including correction or retraction, may follow depending on the outcome of the investigation.

Retraction: A retraction indicates that the paper should no longer be considered part of the scientific literature. Retractions are issued when there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, which may result from misconduct or honest error. Retraction may also occur if findings have been previously published elsewhere without proper referencing, permission, or justification; if the work is plagiarized; or if it reports unethical research. To protect the integrity of the scholarly record, the retracted article is not removed from the online journal; instead, a notice of retraction will be issued, made freely available to all readers, and linked to the retracted article. Retraction will be conducted according to COPE retraction guidelines.

Data Sharing Policy

At NSWA, we are committed to fostering open and responsible data sharing as a way to promote transparency, encourage collaboration, and advance scientific understanding. We believe that making research data accessible benefits both the scientific community and society as a whole.

We actively encourage authors to share their data in a timely and appropriate manner, and we continuously work to improve our submission system to support this process more effectively. Our data sharing policy is based on the following key principles:

1. Promoting Transparency and Reproducibility: We encourage researchers to make the data behind their findings available so others can verify results, reproduce experiments, and build upon the work. Early sharing is supported when feasible, while always respecting ethical standards and legal obligations related to data privacy or confidentiality.
2. Ensuring Proper Credit for Shared Data: We recognize data as a valuable research output. Authors are encouraged to cite datasets using persistent identifiers such as DOIs, ensuring they receive proper acknowledgment for their contributions. Well-documented and curated datasets can and should be cited just like traditional publications.
3. Encouraging Reusability of Data: To make shared data useful to others, we require authors to provide detailed metadata and documentation. This is especially important for datasets related to neutrosophic systems, where clarity and context are essential for reuse and reinterpretation.
4. Supporting Authors in Managing and Sharing Data: We promote the use of reliable tools like Mendeley Data to help authors organize, store, and share their datasets efficiently. We also offer flexible sharing options—including embargoes when needed—to accommodate varying publication and privacy needs.

Authors are encouraged to include a Data Availability Statement in their manuscripts describing where the data supporting the findings can be accessed, or explaining why data cannot be shared due to ethical, legal, or confidentiality constraints.

Desk Rejection Policy

To maintain high standards of academic publishing, the editorial team may reject a manuscript without sending it for peer review. This is known as a desk rejection. It usually occurs when the submission does not meet the basic criteria required for further evaluation. The following reasons commonly lead to desk rejection:

• Scope relevance: If the manuscript does not fit within the journal’s focus areas or topics, it may be rejected. Authors are encouraged to check the Aims and Scope page before submitting their work.
• Ethical compliance: Papers that show ethical problems will not proceed. This includes plagiarism or inappropriate textual overlap identified through similarity checking tools, submitting the same work to more than one journal, data manipulation, or ignoring accepted research ethics.
• Originality and contribution: Submissions must offer a clear theoretical or practical value. If the manuscript lacks innovation or does not add meaningful knowledge to the field, it may be rejected.
• Research design and methods: Papers with major flaws in the study’s design, data analysis, or methods are not accepted. A strong and valid approach is essential.
• Research purpose and clarity: If the paper does not clearly explain its research questions, objectives, or hypothesis, it becomes difficult to evaluate and may be rejected.
• Structure and completeness: A submission must include all major sections of an academic paper. If it lacks a proper literature review, methods, results, or discussion, or if it is poorly organized, it may not be considered.
• Language and readability: Papers written in poor English, with many grammar issues or unclear phrasing, may be rejected due to difficulty in understanding the content.
• Formatting and guidelines: Authors must follow the journal’s submission rules, including the required template, referencing style, and word count. Failure to do so may lead to desk rejection.

Authors whose papers are desk rejected will receive a clear explanation so they can revise their work and submit again, either to this journal or elsewhere.

Funding

NSWA requires authors to disclose any form of funding, including financial support. Authors must describe the role of the sponsors at any stage of the research processing and ensure that the information provided is accurate and according to the funder's requirement.

Images and Figures

Authors must use only images and figures that are relevant and add value to the work. Purely illustrative materials that do not contribute meaningfully should be avoided. Authors must obtain written permission to include any copyrighted materials owned by third parties.

Misconduct

NSWA takes all forms of misconduct seriously and will take all necessary action to protect the integrity of the scholarly record. All allegations of misconduct are handled in accordance with the guidelines and flowcharts of COPE.

Examples of misconduct include (but are not limited to):

• Affiliation misrepresentation
• Breaches in copyright/use of third-party material without appropriate permissions
• Citation manipulation
• Duplicate submission/publication
• Ethics dumping
• Image or data manipulation/fabrication
• Peer review manipulation
• Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism/text-recycling)
• Undisclosed competing interests
• Unethical research

Duplicate Submission and Publication

Authors are required to declare upon submission that the manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere. Detection of a duplicate submission or publication is typically considered as a deliberate act.

Original Work Requirement: Submissions to NSWA must constitute unpublished, original research that is not currently under evaluation by any other publication venue.

Consequences for Duplicate Submission: The journal will impose the following sanctions when duplicate submissions or publications are identified:

• Immediate rejection of the manuscript
• Retraction of any published articles containing duplicate content
• Notification to authors' affiliated institutions
• Potential restrictions on future submissions

Building Upon Previous Research: When authors incorporate elements from their own prior work (whether published or under review), they must:

1. Provide complete citations for all referenced publications
2. Clearly articulate in the manuscript:
   • Significant new theoretical advances
   • Substantive methodological improvements
   • Novel applications or findings
   • Important extensions to prior results

Citation Manipulation

Manuscripts that include citations primarily intended to artificially increase the number of citations to a given author’s work or to articles published in a particular journal will face citation manipulation sanctions.

Data Fabrication and Falsification

The intentional manipulation or fabrication of research data constitutes a severe violation of academic ethics. Such misconduct distorts scientific truth, undermines trust in scholarly work, and has significant consequences for the academic community.

Authors submitting manuscripts must:

• Ensure the accuracy and proper representation of all reported data.
• Maintain complete, unprocessed datasets supporting their findings, where applicable unless ethical, legal, privacy, or practical constraints prevent it.
• Provide these original records upon editorial request.

Failure to produce authentic source data when required will result in immediate manuscript rejection or retraction of published articles. The journal reserves the right to investigate suspected cases of data manipulation using verification methods and tools.

Improper Author Contribution or Attribution

All listed authors must have made significant scientific contributions to the research presented in the manuscript and approved all its claims. It is important to list everyone who made a significant scientific contribution, including students and laboratory technicians.

Redundant Publications

Redundant publications involve the inappropriate division of study outcomes into multiple articles or the publication of substantially overlapping content without proper justification or disclosure. Such practices are considered misconduct.

Image Manipulation

Image files included in manuscripts must not be manipulated in ways that compromise the accuracy or authenticity of the information they convey. Irregular manipulations, including the introduction, enhancement, movement, or removal of features, grouping of images that should be presented separately, or modifications to contrast, brightness, or color balance that obscure or enhance information, are strictly prohibited. If irregular image manipulation is identified during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If identified post-publication, NSWA may take corrective actions, including issuing corrections or retracting the paper. These measures are implemented to uphold the credibility of the scientific record and ensure the accuracy of published findings.

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to Neutrosophic Systems with Applications (NSWA) undergo a structured and impartial peer review process designed to evaluate the scientific quality, originality, rigor, and relevance of the work.

Type of Peer Review

NSWA operates a double-blind peer review system. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. Authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscripts are properly anonymized prior to submission. Reviewer identities are treated as confidential and are not disclosed before, during, or after the review process.

Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript is first assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated member of the editorial team. This initial evaluation determines whether the manuscript:

• falls within the journal’s aims and scope,
• meets basic scholarly and ethical standards, and
• is suitable for external peer review.

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be desk rejected at this stage without external review.

Assignment of Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent for external review to at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers are selected by the editorial team to ensure appropriate disciplinary coverage, independence, and objectivity.

Review and Evaluation

Reviewers assess the manuscript and provide detailed comments addressing, where applicable:

• originality and significance,
• theoretical or methodological soundness,
• data integrity and analysis,
• clarity of presentation, and
• contribution to the field.

Based on their evaluations, reviewers typically recommend one of the following outcomes:

• accept,
• minor revisions,
• major revisions, or
• reject.

Author Revisions

When revisions are requested, authors are invited to submit a revised manuscript together with a point-by-point response to reviewer comments. Revised submissions may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed directly by the editors, depending on the nature of the revisions.

Editorial Decision and Timeline

The first editorial decision, incorporating peer review feedback where applicable, is generally communicated within the timeframe stated on the journal’s Editorial Timeline page. The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection rests with the Editor-in-Chief, who considers the reviewers’ reports, the authors’ responses, and the journal’s editorial standards. Additional review rounds may be conducted when necessary to reach a fair and well-founded decision.

Editorial Oversight

The Editor-in-Chief oversees the entire peer review process to ensure consistency, fairness, and adherence to ethical and academic standards. Editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by commercial, personal, or institutional interests.

Conflicts of Interest in Peer Review

To preserve the integrity and impartiality of the peer review process, editors and reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their judgment.

• Reviewers must decline review invitations if they have any financial, professional, or personal relationships with the authors or the work that could reasonably be perceived as a conflict of interest.
• Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest, including submissions authored or co-authored by themselves, close collaborators, or individuals from the same institution.
• In such cases, the manuscript will be reassigned to an independent editor to ensure an unbiased evaluation.

All conflicts of interest are managed in accordance with COPE guidelines, and transparency and fairness are maintained at every stage of the review process.

Plagiarism

As part of Sciences Force Publisher, NSWA upholds the highest standards of integrity and ethical conduct in research and publication. The journal's policies on plagiarism, data fabrication, and image manipulation are designed to ensure transparency, trustworthiness, and the reliability of scientific contributions.

NSWA unequivocally prohibits plagiarism in any form. Plagiarism includes the unauthorized copying of text, ideas, images, or data from any source, including one's own publications, without proper attribution. Authors are expected to give due credit to original sources, and any reused text must be appropriately quoted and cited. Even when a study's design or manuscript structure is inspired by previous works, explicit citations are mandatory.

To maintain the integrity of our publications, all submissions to NSWA undergo thorough plagiarism checks using industry-standard software, particularly iThenticate. Similarity reports are evaluated carefully by the editorial team to distinguish acceptable overlap (for example, standard methods descriptions or commonly used terminology) from inappropriate or unethical reuse of content. Editorial decisions are based on the nature, extent, and context of the overlap, rather than on a fixed numerical threshold. Manuscripts found to involve plagiarism or unacceptable textual overlap may be rejected or retracted in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Publication Ethics

This journal is fully committed to upholding the ethical guidelines and best practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Both the editorial board and the publisher work together to ensure fairness, transparency, and integrity in every stage of the publishing process.

Editor’s Responsibilities

The Editor, along with the Editorial Board, plays a key role in maintaining the integrity of the journal. Their responsibilities include:

• Managing a fair and impartial double-blind peer review for all submitted manuscripts. Every paper is reviewed without any bias related to the author’s background, including nationality, gender, age, political views, or other personal factors.
• Choosing appropriate peer reviewers and evaluating submissions based solely on their academic merit, the quality of the research, and the clarity of presentation.
• Making the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles.
• Providing new board members and guest editors with clear guidance on how to handle submissions and their duties in the review process.
• Ensuring that unpublished research or data is not misused by editors or others involved in the publication process.
• Responding to ethical concerns and complaints with seriousness and taking the necessary steps to resolve them.
• Issuing corrections or retractions when necessary to preserve the accuracy and reliability of the journal.

Guest Editor’s Responsibilities

Guest Editors are responsible for:

• Defining the scope and themes of special issues and ensuring submitted papers align with those topics.
• Recommending suitable reviewers for the papers submitted to those issues.
• Managing the review timeline, including submission, feedback, revision, and final decision stages.

Reviewer’s Responsibilities

Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the scientific quality of the journal. Their duties include:

• Accepting review assignments only if they have the necessary expertise and can provide objective, helpful feedback.
• Informing the editor as soon as possible if they are unable to review a manuscript or meet the deadline.
• Evaluating submissions based on their scientific merit, without any personal bias.
• Alerting the editor to any suspected cases of plagiarism or copyright infringement.
• Declaring any conflicts of interest that could influence their review.
• Treating all content in submitted papers as confidential and not sharing it with others.

Authors’ Responsibilities

Authors submitting to the journal must:

• Ensure the work is original and not misleading in any way.
• Confirm that all listed authors have made significant contributions to the research and agree with the content of the paper.
• Verify that the article has not been published previously and is not under review elsewhere.
• Clearly state if the article is an extended version of a conference paper, and include substantial new content.
• Ensure that the manuscript does not violate privacy, confidentiality, or intellectual property rights.
• Obtain written permission for any third-party content included in the paper.
• Disclose any conflicts of interest, or declare that none exist.

Publisher's Responsibilities

The publisher supports the editorial team while respecting their independence in editorial decisions. In addition, the publisher protects intellectual property rights and ensures the journal complies with high standards of publication ethics and professional integrity.

Preprints Policy

Authors can share their preprint anywhere at any time. If their manuscript is accepted for publication, we encourage authors to link the preprint to the formal publication using its Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Authors may also update their preprints on preprint databases such as arXiv with the accepted version of their manuscript.

Special Issues

At NSWA, Special Issues are carefully planned each year to explore timely and innovative topics within the field of neutrosophic systems, logic, and their diverse applications. The Editorial Board selects the themes for these issues, and official Calls for Papers (CFPs) are typically released during the first quarter of the year (January to March). Each CFP is designed to attract high-quality research contributions by highlighting current trends and important advancements.

Appointment of Guest Editors

Guest Editors are chosen based on their subject expertise, academic background, and prior editorial experience. Nominations can come from the Editorial Board, current editors, or be self-submitted by qualified individuals.

Guest Editors are responsible for:

• Defining the focus and scope of the Special Issue, and drafting the CFP.
• Managing the manuscript submission and peer review process.
• Ensuring each submission is thoroughly reviewed for quality, originality, and relevance.
• Making final decisions on manuscripts, in coordination with the Editor-in-Chief.

Proposing a Special Issue

Researchers interested in organizing a Special Issue must submit a formal proposal that outlines:

• The topic and goals of the issue, aligned with NSWA’s academic focus.
• The intended readership and target contributors.
• A proposed timeline, from submission through review and publication.
• Names of suggested Guest Editors.
• All proposals are reviewed by the Editorial Board and the Editor-in-Chief for approval.

Submission and Review

All manuscripts submitted to a Special Issue must follow NSWA’s author guidelines and submission requirements. After an initial screening by the Guest Editors for topic relevance and basic quality, papers undergo a double-blind peer review process conducted by experts in neutrosophic research.

Publication Timeline

Regular journal issues are published monthly. Special Issues are typically scheduled for summer release (July or August), though submissions are accepted and processed continuously.

After Publication

All articles are actively promoted through NSWA’s publishing platforms and indexing channels. Citation data, download numbers, and other metrics are closely monitored to track the academic impact of each Special Issue.

Standards of Reporting

To ensure scholarly rigor and replicability, authors must provide complete documentation of their research design, including theoretical foundations, methodological approaches, analytical procedures, and implementation details specific to neutrosophic systems.

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Use of AI in Writing

The following guidance pertains only to the writing process, not to the use of AI tools for analyzing and drawing insights from data. When authors use generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in writing, they should do so solely to enhance readability and language. The application of these technologies must involve human oversight and control, as AI can produce authoritative-sounding output that may be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be listed as authors or co-authors, nor should they be cited as such, as authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to humans, as outlined in NSWA’s AI policy for authors.

Use of AI in Peer Review

To protect authors' rights and maintain research confidentiality, the journal does not currently permit the use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies, such as ChatGPT, for peer review. We are actively evaluating compliant AI tools and may revise this policy in the future.

Use of Third-Party Material

Authors are required to secure appropriate permissions to reuse any third-party content included in their articles. Limited use of brief text excerpts and certain other materials may be allowed without formal permission, particularly for critique or review. If authors intend to incorporate material they do not own the copyright to and that does not fall under these informal exceptions, they must obtain written authorization from the copyright holder before submitting their manuscript. For further guidance on requesting permission to reproduce copyrighted content, please contact nswa@sciencesforce.com.