Focus and Scope

The Control Systems and Optimization Letters focus on control system development and solving problems using optimization algorithms to reach 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The scope is linear control, nonlinear control, optimal control, adaptive control, robust control, geometry control, and intelligent control.

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

This journal uses single-blind peer-review, which means that the reviewers of the paper won’t get to know the identity of the author(s), and the author(s) won’t get to know the identity of the reviewer. The idea is that everyone should get a similar and unbiased review.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

(http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf)

If CSOL’s Editor has invited you to review a manuscript, please consider the following items:

• Reviewing manuscript critically but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the manuscript to help authors improve their research;
• Reviewing multiple versions of a manuscript as necessary;
• Providing all required information within established deadlines;
• Making recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication in the journal;
• Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content of a manuscript they are asked to review;
• Reporting possible research misconducts;
• Suggesting alternative reviewers in case they cannot review the manuscript for any reasons;
• Treating the manuscript as a confidential document;
• Not making any use of the work described in the manuscript;
• Not communicating directly with authors, if somehow they identify the authors;
• Not identifying themselves to authors;
• Not passing on the assigned manuscript to another reviewer;
• Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original research;
• Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned manuscript is under consideration in any other publication to his/her knowledge;
• Writing a review report in English only;
• Authoring a commentary for publication related to the reviewed manuscript.

What should be checked while reviewing a manuscript?

• Novelty;
• Originality;
• Scientific reliability;
• A valuable contribution to science;
• Adding new aspects to the existing field of study;
• Ethical aspects;
• Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to authors’ guidelines;
• References provided to substantiate the content;
• Grammar, punctuation, and spelling;
• Scientific misconduct.

Publication Frequency

March, July, and November

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global knowledge exchange.

Withdrawn of Manuscript

The author is not allowed to withdraw the submitted manuscripts because the withdrawal wastes valuable resources from editors and reviewers who spent a great deal of time processing the submitted manuscripts and works invested by the Publisher. However, the authors could suggest the withdrawal if there is no updated progress review information after six months from our side.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The ethical policy of Control Systems and Optimization Letters is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and complies with International Committee of CSOL Editorial Board codes of conduct. Readers, authors, reviewers and editors should follow these ethical policies once working with CSOL. The ethical policy is liable to determine which of the typical research papers or articles submitted to the journal should be published in the concerned issue. For information on this matter in publishing and ethical guidelines, please visit http://publicationethics.org

Principles of Transparency and Publication Ethics

(https://publicationethics.org/files/Principles_of_Transparency_and_Best_Practice_in_Scholarly_Publishingv3_0.pdf)

Peer review process: CSOL is a single-blind peer-reviewed electronic three-monthly publication concerned with all aspects of Control Systems and Optimization. This process, as well as any policies related to the journal’s peer review procedures, is clearly described on the journal’s Web site (http://ijournalse.org/index.php/ESJ/about/editorialPolicies#custom-5).

Governing Body: CSOL has a very strong editorial board whose members are recognized experts in the subject areas included within the journal’s scope. The full names and affiliations of the journal’s editors are provided on the journal’s Web site (http://ijournalse.org/index.php/ESJ/about/editorialTeam).

Identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct: Editor-in-Chief takes reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others.

Website: A journal’s Website (http://www.ijournalse.org) contains that care has been taken to ensure high ethical and professional standards.

Contact information: Journal provided the contact information for the editorial office of CSOL (https://ejournal.csol.or.id/index.php/csol/about/contact).

Name of journal: The Journal name of Control Systems and Optimization Letters (CSOL) has unique and not one that is easily confused with another journal.

Conflicts of interest: Authors have requested to be evident whether impending conflicts do or do not exist while submitting their articles to CSOL through Conflict of Interest Disclosure form (http://ijournalse.org/Guideline/Conflict%20of%20Interest.docx).

Declaration of Competing Interests: The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers that she/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Further, any such submission must be subject to all of the journal’s usual procedures, peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups, and there must be a clear statement to this effect on any such paper published.

Acknowledgments: All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an ‘Acknowledgements’ section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help or writing assistance or a department chair who provided only general support.

Disclosure of Funding Sources: CSOL authors must declare what support they received to carry out their research. Declaring funding sources acknowledges funders’ contributions, fulfills funding requirements and promotes greater transparency in the research process.

* Note: CSOL will not consider for publication manuscripts in which any of the research costs or authors' salaries have been funded, in whole or in part, by a tobacco company.

Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

(http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf)

• The Editors of the journal should have the full authority to reject/accept a manuscript.
• The Editors of the journal should maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts under review or until they are published.
• The Editor-in-Chief should take a decision on submitted manuscripts, whether to be published or not, with other editors and reviewers
• The Editors of the journal should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
• The Editors of the journal should disclose and try to avoid any conflict of interest.
• The Editors of the journal should maintain academic integrity and strive to meet the needs of readers and authors.
• The Editors of the journal should be willing to investigate plagiarism and fraudulent data issues and willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
• The Editors of the journal should limit themselves only to the intellectual content.
• The Editors of the journal must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.
• Guest editors play a vital role in acquiring content and leading the review process for special issue publications.
• Associate editors play a key role in peer-reviewed publishing, supporting the journal editor as subject experts on various topics. Associate editors oversee assigned manuscripts, moving these papers through review and revision. AEs are responsible for assessing manuscript quality, obtaining peer reviews, requesting revisions where appropriate, and making recommendations to the journal editor about the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript..

Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

(http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf)

• The Reviewers of the journal should assist the Editors in deciding to publish the submitted manuscripts.
• The Reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts they are invited to review.
• The Reviewers should provide comments in time that will help editors to decide on whether the submitted manuscript is to be published or not.
• The Reviewers are bound to treat the manuscript received for peer reviewing as confidential and must not use the information obtained through peer review for personal advantage.
• The Reviewers comments against each invited manuscript should be technical, professional and objective.
• The Reviewers should not review the manuscripts in which they have found conflicts of interest with any authors, companies, or institutions.
• The Reviewers should disclose and try to avoid any conflict of interest.

Authors of Emerging Science Journal must confirm the following:

• Submitted manuscripts must be the original work of the author(s),
• The submitting corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the manuscript article's publication has been approved by all the other coauthors.
• Only unpublished manuscripts should be submitted,
• All authors have agreed to allow the corresponding author to serve as the correspondent with the editorial office, to review the edited manuscript and proof,
• Acknowledge the sources of data used in the development of the manuscript,
• All listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and approved all its claims,
• All errors discovered in the manuscript after submission must be swiftly communicated to the Editor,
• All authors must know that the submitted manuscripts under review or published with ESJ are subject to screening using Plagiarism Prevention Software. Plagiarism is a serious violation of publication ethics.

Allegations of Misconduct

Plagiarism

Plagiarism includes:

• Directly copying text from other sources without attribution
• Copying ideas, images, or data from other sources without attribution
• Reusing text from your own previous publications without attribution or agreement of the editor
• Exception: Reusing text from the Methods section in the author’s previous publications, with attribution to the source, is acceptable.
• Using an idea from another source with slightly modified language without attribution.

If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, we may issue a correction or retract the paper as appropriate.

Data fabrication 

This concerns the making up of research findings.

• Suspected fabricated data in a submitted manuscript
• Suspected fabricated data in a published manuscript

Data falsification 

Manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This includes manipulating images (e.g., micrographs, gels, radiological images), removing outliers or “inconvenient” results, changing, adding or omitting data points, etc.

Duplicate submissions

Duplicate submission is a situation whereby an author submits the same or similar manuscripts to two different journals at the same time, either within Academic Journals or any other publisher. This includes the submission of manuscripts derived from the same data in such a manner that there are no substantial differences in the manuscripts. Duplicate submission also includes the submission of the same/similar manuscript in different languages to different journals.

Authorship Issues

Clear policies (that allow for transparency around who contributed to the work and in what capacity) should be in place for requirements for authorship and contributorship, as well as processes for managing potential disputes.

Citation Manipulation

Citation Manipulation includes excessive citations in the submitted manuscript that do not contribute to the scholarly content of the article and have been included solely for the purpose of increasing citations to a given author’s work or to articles published in a particular journal. This leads to misrepresenting the importance of the specific work and journal in which it appears and is thus a form of scientific misconduct.

Suspected Manipulation of Peer Review/Bias of Peer Reviews

International Journal of Robotics and Control Systems selects the reviewers on any manuscript with due care so as to avoid any conflict of interest between the reviewers and the authors. Our policy is compliant with COPE Guidelines on peer review.

Advertising

At present, we do not publish any advertisements in this journal.

Ethical Guidance

Ethical Oversight

According to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ethical oversight should include but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and ethical business/marketing practices. The Journal is committed to considering appeals concerning our authors' non-observance of ethical principles.

Research Involving Human Subjects

When reporting studies that involve human participants, authors should include a statement that the studies have been approved by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee and have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/medical-ethics/declaration-of-helsinki/), revised in 2013, and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the 1975 Helsinki Declaration or comparable standards, the authors must explain the reasons for their approach and demonstrate that the independent ethics committee or institutional review board explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. At a minimum, a statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board should be stated in Section ‘Ethical Approval’ of the article.

An example of an ethical statement: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before participating in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)."

Use of Animals in Research

The welfare of animals used for research must be respected. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals have been followed and that the studies have been approved by a research ethics committee at the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted (where such a committee exists).

The Journal endorses the ARRIVE guidelines (https://arriveguidelines.org/arrive-guidelines) for reporting experiments using live animals. Authors and reviewers can use the ARRIVE guidelines as a checklist, which can be found at: https://arriveguidelines.org/resources/author-checklists.

Research Involving Cell Lines

Methods sections for submissions reporting on research with cell lines should state the origin of any cell lines. For established cell lines, the provenance should be stated, and references must also be given to either a published paper or a commercial source. If previously unpublished de novo cell lines were used, including those gifted from another laboratory, details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval must be given, and confirmation of written informed consent must be provided if the line is of human origin.

Example of an ethical statement: "The HCT116 cell line was obtained from XXX. The MLH1+ cell line was provided by XXX, Ltd. The DLD-1 cell line was obtained from Dr. XXX. The DR-GFP and SA-GFP reporter plasmids were obtained from Dr. XXX, and the Rad51K133A expression vector was obtained from Dr. XXX."

Research Involving Plants

Experimental research on plants (either cultivated or wild), including a collection of plant material, must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines. We recommend that authors comply with the CBD (https://www.cbd.int/convention/) and the CITES (https://cites.org/eng).

For each submitted manuscript supporting genetic information and origin must be provided. For research manuscripts involving rare and non-model plants (other than, e.g., Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana benthamiana, Oriza sativa, or many other typical model plants), voucher specimens must be deposited in an accessible herbarium or museum. Vouchers may be requested for review by future investigators to verify the identity of the material used in the study (especially if taxonomic rearrangements occur in the future). They should include details of the populations sampled on the site of collection (GPS coordinates), date of collection, and document the part(s) used in the study where appropriate. For rare, threatened, or endangered species, this can be waived, but it is necessary for the author to describe this in the cover letter.

Example of an ethical statement: "Torenia fournieri plants were used in this study. White-flowered Crown White (CrW) and violet-flowered Crown Violet (CrV) cultivars selected from ‘Crown Mix’ (XXX Company, City, Country) were kindly provided by Dr. XXX (XXX Institute, City, Country)."

Retraction

The papers published in the Journal will be considered to retract in the publication if:

1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error)
2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
3. it constitutes plagiarism
4. it reports unethical research

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines.

Plagiarism

The maximal plagiarism is 25%, with each source maximal 4%. It will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.