Peer Review Process
The Journal of Post-Quantum Cryptography and Systems (JPQCS) follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the scientific quality, technical accuracy, and ethical integrity of all manuscripts considered for publication. The journal adheres to internationally recognized ethical guidelines for peer reviewers and follows the best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to maintain transparency, fairness, and accountability throughout the review process.
Each submitted manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation by the editorial office. During this stage, the manuscript is assessed for:
- Alignment with the aims and scope of the journal
- Compliance with the journal’s author guidelines and submission requirements
- Originality, relevance, and academic merit
Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage without external peer review, in accordance with good editorial practices recommended by COPE.
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are forwarded to two or more independent expert reviewers with expertise in post-quantum cryptography, cybersecurity, cryptographic systems, or related computational and information security disciplines.
The journal follows a double-blind review model, meaning that the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. This approach promotes an objective, fair, and unbiased evaluation consistent with ethical peer review standards recommended by COPE.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several academic and technical factors, including:
- Originality and contribution to the field of cryptography and cybersecurity
- Methodological rigor and sound research design
- Accuracy and reliability of data analysis and interpretation
- Relevance to emerging challenges in post-quantum cryptography
- Clarity, organization, and overall presentation of the manuscript
- Compliance with ethical and professional research standards
Reviewers are expected to follow COPE reviewer guidelines, ensuring confidentiality, objectivity, and ethical conduct throughout the review process.
After receiving reviewer reports, the editorial office evaluates the feedback and communicates a decision to the authors. Possible editorial decisions include:
- Accept
- Accept with minor revisions
- Major revisions required
- Reject
Authors receive detailed and constructive reviewer comments to assist them in improving the quality and clarity of their manuscript.
When revisions are requested, authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed response to reviewer comments explaining how each concern has been addressed.
The revised manuscript is evaluated by the handling editor and, when necessary, may be returned to the original reviewers for further assessment, following transparent editorial practices aligned with COPE recommendations.
The final decision regarding publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into consideration reviewer recommendations and the editorial evaluation of the revised manuscript. Editorial decisions are made independently and ethically.
The Journal of Post-Quantum Cryptography and Systems is committed to maintaining a timely, transparent, and efficient peer review process. While the journal aims to minimize review time, it prioritizes scientific rigor, academic integrity, and ethical publishing standards.
Editors and reviewers involved in the peer review process must adhere to strict ethical responsibilities, including:
- Maintaining confidentiality of submitted manuscripts
- Disclosing conflicts of interest that may influence the review process
- Ensuring professionalism, fairness, and objectivity in manuscript evaluation
These responsibilities align with the ethical principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for responsible scholarly publishing.
