Publication Ethics

This section provides brief guidelines and publication ethics code for all publication types from the Prognostics and Health Management Society


              Download Code
Editorial Responsibilities
The Editorial Board constitutes of the members of the technical program committee and the proceedings committee (TPC) for a PHM conference. The board is responsible for all papers published in the conference proceedings. While reviewers help determine the technical quality and merits to qualify for publication in the conference proceedings, the ultimate control to publish a paper resides with the TPC. The TPC together with the proceedings committee continuously strive to maintain a high quality conference proceedings.
A single-blind peer review process is followed where the reviewers are never known to the authors, but the authors are always known to the reviewers. In this way, the paper does not hide relevant aspects (e.g., references to other papers by the same authors) that may be helpful for a balanced and fully informed review. Upon completion of the review process of a paper, access to the TPC’s decision will be available to all anonymous reviewers through online review system for paper review.

Author Responsibilities
Contributions to a PHM Conference must report original research and will be subjected to review by reviewers at the discretion of the TPC. PHM Conferences consider only manuscripts that have not been published elsewhere and that are not under consideration for publication or in press elsewhere. Moreover, it is the responsibility of the author to ensure that any data or information submitted complies with the export-control regulations of the author’s home country (e.g., International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) in the United States). Likewise, authors should ensure that data and information submitted complies with internal IP and proprietary guidelines of their respective companies.
If authors choose to disclose and acknowledge the supporting organization and the program under which the research was conducted, this information will be visible to the reader. Authors can choose to provide this information on the submission page or as suggested in the manuscript templates under the acknowledgement section.
Authors must follow detailed guidelines provided in the instructions For Authors section of the conference page and should comply with code of conduct provided by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).

Decisions and Appeals
Decisions to accept or reject a submission for publication are solely based on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the topics related to prognostics and health management. Determination of these merits in a paper is largely based on reviewer recommendations. Decisions are based on consensus of two or more reviews. In cases where a clear consensus is not reached in the first round editors generally request additional reviews until a decision is possible. All reviews are made available to the authors, without revealing reviewer names, regardless of what decision is made.

  • Acceptance
    A paper may be accepted as is, with minor revisions, or with major revisions. If the paper is recommended as is it is immediately published and authors are accordingly notified. However, if a paper is recommended for publication after revisions the paper is first accepted conditionally and authors are requested to revise their paper within a specified time frame. A paper requiring minor revisions is reviewed by the Review manager to determine if the revisions are satisfactory before it is recommended to the proceedings committee for publication. However, if a paper needs major revisions, the revised paper is sent for a re-review to the reviewer(s) requesting major revisions. The paper is not finally accepted until the reviewers are satisfied with the revised versions. A paper may be re-reviewed up to a maximum of two times and if a consensus is still not reached between the reviewer(s) and the authors, TPC intervenes and makes a final decision to accept or reject that paper.
  • Rejection
    In case a paper is rejected the authors are notified of the decision along with a clear reason compiled by review manager and the editors based on reviewer recommendations.
  • Submission Withdrawal
    Authors have a right to withdraw their submissions before any of the reviews are completed. Upon such withdrawals the manuscripts are no longer available to any of the reviewers and the TPC. The PHM Society does not retain a copy of a withdrawn manuscript in its database. However, the submission information with metadata and abstract, provided at the time of submission, is retained for the records. This information is not made public and is only available to the submitting author and the administrators of the society website. Once the reviews are completed the paper cannot be withdrawn by the authors. If they still wish to retract their submission the TPC will reject that paper to exclude from publication. This is done out of respect for the time and effort reviewers have already put in and also to track duplicate submissions on the same subject at which point the original reviewers, if available at that time, will be called upon.

Reviewer Guidelines
PHM Conferences follows a single blind review process where reviewer identities are never revealed to the authors. Only review managers and the TPC have access to the reviewer identities. Furthermore, review managers are requested to rate the review quality from each reviewer. This serves as a knowledgebase for review managers as a means to access past records for all reviewers. This ensures maintaining a high quality reviewer pool. Again this information is kept confidential and not revealed to anybody except the review managers and the society administrators.
Detailed review process and guidelines are provided in review requests to potential reviewers. In general, reviewers must observe the code of conduct provided by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).

Complaints
For any complaints made regarding violation of publication ethics the TPC will follow COPE guidelines and try to resolve the matter at their earliest.

Conflicts of Interest
Conflicts of interest may arise when reviewers and TPC members themselves author or co-author a manuscript or any of the review managers and/or the reviewers are associated with the work by way of authoring or supporting the research. At the TPC level such cases are handled by assigning other members to oversee review process for such submissions. At the reviewer level the TPC relies on the diligence of review managers to ensure avoiding any conflicts of interest and an honor system from requested reviewers to notify of their conflicts of interest to the TPC.

Integrity of the Academic Record
The PHM Society takes the integrity of the academic record very seriously. If at any point it is found that a significantly inaccurate, misleading statement, or distorted report has been published, it will be corrected promptly and with due prominence. If, after an appropriate investigation, an item proves to be fraudulent, it will be immediately retracted and immediately notified to all members of the PHM Society and indexing systems.

  
 
 
 

follow us

PHM Society on Facebook Follow PHM Society on Twitter PHM Society on LinkedIn PHM Society RSS News Feed