JIP Detailed Editing Procedures and Regulations
"Journal of Information Processing" Detailed Editing Procedures and Regulations
Revised on April 25, 2022
Chapter 1. Administration of Editorial Committee and Reviewers
Article 1. The following procedures and regulations shall be undertaken at the Editorial Committee of the Journal of Information Processing (hereinafter referred to as the Editorial Committee) in accordance with Article 7 of the Editing Regulations.
(1) The Editorial Committee shall organize Subgroups that correspond to each information processing field and shall act as subcommittees in accordance with Article 8 of the Editing Regulations.
(2) One Chief Examiner and one or a few Deputy Chief Examiners shall be appointed for each Subgroup and shall be selected by the Editorial Committee. Each Chief Examiner shall assist the Editor in Chief as an Associate Editor in Chief. The term of office of the Chief Examiners and the Deputy Chief Examiners shall be one year. They may serve consecutive terms.
(3) The subgroups and the Editorial Board shall hold a monthly Editorial Committee Meeting.
(4) The Editorial Board shall be comprised of the following persons: the Editor in Chief, the Associate Editors in Chief, and the Deputy Chief Examiners of the Subgroups.
(5) The Editorial Committee may also establish a temporal Special Issue Group that will act as a subcommittee and be responsible for specific operations particular to the editing of special issues.
Article 2. The Editorial Board shall be responsible for the following.
(1) Establishing fundamental policies for the editing of the Journal of Information Processing.
(2) Establishing yearly plans.
(3) Establishing editorial policies for the Journal of Information Processing.
(4) Nominating Reviewers.
(5) Establishing procedures for submitted manuscripts.
(6) Establishing and Implementing procedures for assigning Meta-reviewers and Reviewers to submitted manuscripts.
(7) Managing review processes.
(8) Handling problematic papers.
(9) Coordination among the Subgroups.
(10) Recommending Editorial Committee Members.
(11) Any other principal operations pertaining to the editing and publishing of the Journal of Information Processing.
Article 3. The Subgroups shall be responsible for the following.
(1) Planning articles for the Journal of Information Processing.
(2) Assigning Reviewers to each submitted manuscript and overseeing the review processes.
(3) Drafting procedures for editing submitted manuscripts.
(4) Providing solutions for problematic papers after the discussions in the Editorial Board.
(5) Any other operations necessary for the editing and publishing of the Journal of Information Processing.
(Editorial Committee Members and Guest Members)
Article 4. Editorial Committee Members and Guest Members shall be selected from Reviewers of the Journal of Information Processing and members of the Information Processing Society of Japan (IPSJ) who have played a significant role at another academic society:
(1) Editorial Committee Members shall cover each information processing field and be able to appropriately examine all submitted manuscripts without causing critical delay.
(2) Editorial Committee Members shall attend Editorial Committee Meetings and be responsible for activities such as assigning Reviewers, managing review processes, and drafting procedures for the editing process for submitted manuscripts.
Article 5. Editorial Committee Members shall be appointed to the Subgroups. Editorial Committee Members shall share responsibilities pertaining to editorial missions in order to help the Editorial Committee achieve its objectives. Editorial Committee Guest Members shall also be responsible for these activities.
Article 6. Reviewers shall be selected from IPSJ members who have presented two or more papers to the Journal of Information Processing or another reputable journal or have been recommended by two or more Editorial Committee Members. In addition, the Editorial Committee may temporarily assign a "Special Review" to a person who is not a Reviewer when deemed necessary. The Editorial Committee may also recommend that a new Reviewer be assigned when deemed necessary.
Article 7. Reviewers shall review manuscripts. The term of office of a Reviewer shall be three years and shall not exceed two consecutive terms.
Article 8. The Editorial Committee shall select Senior Reviewers from Reviewers that have retired.
Article 9. Senior Reviewers shall review manuscripts in cases where her/his expertise is required and in cases when there are no suitable Reviewers available. The term of office of a Senior Reviewer shall be three years. Senior Reviewers shall need to have reviewed a manuscript in order to be reappointed.
Article 10. Honorary Reviewers shall be appointed by the Editorial Committee from persons who have been Editorial Committee Members, Reviewers, or Senior Reviewers for a minimum of twenty years.
Article 11. Honorary Reviewers shall review manuscripts when her/his expertise is required. The term of office of an Honorary Reviewer is for life.
Chapter 2. Editing
(Journal name, Publication, Article Types)
Article 12. The name, publication, and the original copy of the Journal of Information Processing shall be the followings.
(1) The name shall be "Journal of Information Processing".
(2) The original copy shall be published online after approval.
(3) The volume (Vol.) shall be assigned in accordance with the publication year.
Article 13. The Journal of Information Processing may plan and edit special issues. The Journal of Information Processing may organize joint special issues with the IPSJ Journal.
Article 14. Articles shall be classified as follows. Among them (a) and (b) shall be called Accepted Papers.
A description of research that is academic or technical in nature or products of development. The description should be valuable to members of the IPSJ from the viewpoints of novelty and usefulness.
(b) Technical Note
A report on new research and/or development results or a proposal that is technical in nature.
Questions and answers pertaining to a Paper and a Technical Note.
Article 15. Manuscripts of Papers or Technical Notes may be submitted through the following method:
(a) Regular Submission
A voluntary submission by an author (or authors) that cannot be categorized as a special issue submission (b) or as a recommended paper submission (c).
(b) Special Issue Submission
A submission to the Call for Papers by the Special Issue Group comprised of Editorial Committee Members and Guest Members. (Refer to Article 17)
(c) Recommended Paper Submission
A submission based on a manuscript that is approved as excellent by the organizers or the program committee in a Special Interest Group Meeting, a symposium, a workshop, an international conference or an IPSJ-branch supported symposium. (Refer to Article 18)
(d) Invited Paper Submission
A submission of a paper that the Editorial Committee or the Special Issue Group has requested. (Refer to Article 19)
Chapter 3. Procedure for Handling Submitted Manuscripts
(Regular Papers and Technical Notes)
Article 16. The procedure for handling submitted manuscripts as regular papers or technical notes is as follows.
(1) The IPSJ secretariat receives a submitted manuscript and sends a receipt to the author acknowledging that her/his manuscript has been received after the receiving process is complete. The receipt includes the date when the manuscript was received and a paper ID. The IPSJ secretariat qualifies the conditions of the author(s) and the manuscript. If they are not satisfied with the conditions, the IPSJ secretariat reports this dissatisfaction to the author(s). When the manuscript is published, it includes the dates it was received and accepted.
(2) An Editorial Committee Member matching keywords in the submitted manuscript is selected as a Meta-reviewer.
(3) A Meta-reviewer selects Reviewers by referring to keywords and summary in the submitted manuscript and by considering the following items, and then gets the agreement of review from Reviewers within one week of the manuscript having been submitted.
a) The research field of the Reviewers covers the research field of the submitted manuscript.
b) The Reviewer does not belong to the same affiliates of the authors.
c) The Reviewer does not hold more than or equal to three manuscripts to be reviewed.
(4) Two Reviewers shall be assigned for each regular paper, and one Reviewer shall be assigned for each technical note, under ordinary circumstances.
(5) Authors shall not be given the names of the Reviewers and Meta-reviewer that are working on their papers or technical notes.
(6) If an Editorial Committee Member assigned to review a manuscript or an Editorial Board Member determines that the manuscript is unfit for publication in the Journal, the Editorial Committee Member or the Editorial Board Member may make a suggestion to the Editorial Committee that it should be desk-rejected, along with a statement of reason for such suggestion, without requesting a Reviewer to perform its peer review. If the Editorial Committee receives such suggestion, it shall discuss it and make a determination on whether or not to accept the suggestion. The Editorial Committee may make its determination to desk-reject such manuscripts as described below:
a) manuscripts that are outside the areas of focus of the IPSJ Journals;
b) manuscripts that are determined as multiple submissions or plagiarized works; or
c) manuscripts that are otherwise deemed by the Editorial Committee as unfit for peer review due to lacking proper form as scholarly papers, etc.
If the Editorial Committee determines that a submitted manuscript should be desk-rejected, it shall notify the authors of the determination along with a statement of reason for such determination.
(7) If the Reviewer refuses to do a review, she/he should request that the Meta-reviewer via the IPSJ secretariat of this refusal within one week. After the secretariat has been notified of the refusal, the Meta-reviewer shall immediately assign another Reviewer to the review.
(8) If the Reviewer agrees to do a review, she/he shall review the manuscript within one month in accordance with the "How to write a review", the "Basic policies for reviewing regular papers", and the "Procedure for reviewing regular papers". (For technical notes, the reviewer shall review the manuscript in accordance with the "How to write a review", the "Basic policies for reviewing technical notes", and the "Procedure for reviewing technical notes". These documents, as a whole, are referred to by "Guidance of review" in the following.) If a Reviewer estimates that a review will take longer than one month, she/he should notify the IPSJ secretariat.
(9) The IPSJ secretariat replaces the Reviewer after discussing with a Meta-reviewer when the Reviewer requests the replace or there is a critical delay.
(10) When the review has been completed, the Reviewer categorizes the manuscript as an "acceptance", a "conditional acceptance", or a "rejection" for a regular paper, or categorizes it as an "acceptance" or a "rejection" for a technical note in accordance with the "Guidance of review". The Reviewer then fills out a review form and sends it to the IPSJ secretariat.
(11) The originality of a regular paper is not affected by the technical note that has already been published or accepted if the regular paper is an extension of the technical note.
(12) If a manuscript is categorized as a "conditional acceptance", the IPSJ secretariat sends inquiries, including conditions for acceptance, to the author. Responses from the author shall be received within eight weeks after the inquiry was made. After eight weeks, the Editorial Board shall, in principle, decide that the submitted manuscript is rejected.
(13) The Editorial Committee decides how each submitted manuscript is handled on the basis of the review results of Reviewers in accordance with the "Guidance of review" The Editorial Board eventually decides if a submitted manuscript is accepted or rejected and then notifies the author of the acceptance or rejection. Reasons for rejection must be attached to a rejection notification.
(14) Communication among authors, Meta-reviewer, Reviewers, and the IPSJ secretariat shall for the most part be done by E-mail.
(Papers and technical notes for special issues)
Article 17. The Editorial Board shall discuss proposals of "special issues". If a proposal is accepted, an Editorial Committee for Special Issues shall be created as a subcommittee in accordance with Article 8 of the Editing Regulations.
(1) Proposals for special issues should include the following.
- title of the special issue
- names and affiliates of those who made the proposal
- aim(s) of the special issue
- estimated number of accepted papers for the special issue
- publication schedule
- Editorial Committee members that will work on the special issue. The committee shall consist of an Editor in Chief and Editorial Committee Members. It should include at least two members of the Editorial Committee from the Journal of Information Processing, and one of them must be a member of the Editorial Board.
(2) The Editor in Chief of the Editorial Committee for the Special Issues shall become the Guest Editor of the Special Issues, and shall be responsible for publication of the special issues.
(3) The Editorial Committee for Special Issues shall announce a call for papers for the special issues, assign Meta-reviewers and Reviewers to submitted manuscripts, create their reviews, and propose handling decisions.
(4) The Editorial Committee for Special Issues shall widely advertise a call for papers to the general public. In addition, the Editorial Committee can propose invited papers to the Editorial Board.
(5) If the Editorial Committee for Special Issues determines that a submitted manuscript should be desk-rejected pursuant to Article 16 (6) hereof, the Editorial Committee for Special Issues may make a suggestion to the Journal Editorial Committee that it should be desk-rejected, along with a statement of reason for such suggestion. For this purpose, the phrase “outside the areas of focus of the IPSJ Journals” as set forth in Article 16 (6) (a) hereof shall be instead read as “outside the areas of focus of Special Issues.” If any such manuscript apparently falls outside the areas of focus of the Special Issue for which it is submitted but falls within the areas of focus of any of the IPSJ Journals, a recommendation shall be made that the authors resubmit the manuscript as a regular manuscript. If the authors concur with such recommendation and desire to have it peer-reviewed as a regular manuscript, they shall resubmit the manuscript accordingly, in which case, the authors may receive a prior inquiry from the IPSJ through its secretariat.
(6) The Editorial Committee for Special Issues shall report reviews and decisions made pertaining to the handling of manuscripts immediately after the Editorial Committee for Special Issues meeting.
(7) The Editorial Committee for Special Issues shall create the content of the special issues after decisions pertaining to the handling of submitted manuscripts and to the publication schedule have been made, and shall get the approval from the Editorial Board.
(8) If there are changes made in the proposal, the Editorial Committee for Special Issues shall report the changes to the Editorial Board, and shall get the approval from the Editorial Board.
(9) The Editorial Committee for Special Issues shall be dissolved after the special issues are published.
(Recommended submission of papers and technical notes)
Article 18. Chairs of the SIG (Special Interest Group), chairs of branches of the IPSJ, or chairs of workshops held by the IPSJ (hereinafter referred to as "recommenders") can recommend manuscripts presented at an event as candidates for recommended papers to the Editorial Board. The number of candidates of recommended papers of an event shall be limited to the smallest of ten and 10% of the presented papers at an event. If the Editorial Board approves a paper, the paper submission shall be called a "recommended submission". The procedure for handling a recommended submission is as follows.
(1) The Editorial Committee requests that the recommender be the Meta-reviewer of the recommended submission. If the recommendation has been made from a symposium hosted by a branch of the IPSJ, a recommender selects a Meta-reviewer who has profound knowledge of the particular research field from where the recommended submission has come.
(2) The Meta-reviewer reviews the manuscript in accordance with the procedures for reviewing regular papers outlined in article 16.
(3) If the manuscript is accepted, the published paper includes a message of recommendation just before the biographies.
(4) If the manuscript is rejected, the procedure for handling the recommended submission is complete.
Article 19. Using a proposal from the Subgroups or the Editorial Committee for Special Issues, the Editorial Board can determine the title, the author, and the number of pages of a manuscript and request that the author write a paper for the journal. The request shall be made by the Editor in Chief of the Editorial Committee of the Journal of Information Processing or, if the proposal was made by the Editorial Committee for Special Issues, the request shall be made by the Editor in Chief of this committee.
(1) The number of the invited papers in a month shall be at most five.
(2) One editorial member of a Subgroup or a Committee Member for the Special Issues shall read the manuscript, and if the manuscript is not publishable the editorial member shall request that the author correct it.
Article 20. The procedure for submitting a manuscript of a printed discussion is the same as that outlined in Article 16. If a printed discussion corresponds to a particular published paper or technical note, the IPSJ secretariat shall send the manuscript to the author and request that the author write a reply. The IPSJ secretariat shall plan to publish the printed discussion with the author's reply at the same time in order to help readers better understand the discussion.
Article 21. Information for authors, review criteria, and details of the review procedure shall be determined in other documents.
Article 22. The Editorial Committee shall annually publish a list of Reviewers in order to acknowledge contributions of Reviewers.
Chapter 4. Supplements
Article 23. The IPSJ Journal Organization Committee can decide to modify, and delete the articles.
Article 24. These regulations shall take effect from the date when IPSJ Governing Board for Journals and Transactions decides, and shall be enforced from 1st April 2008.
Article 25. Enforcement of these regulations shall replace "the detailed editing regulations of the IPSJ Digital Courier".