To strengthen academic integrity and standardize the submission, review, and publication processes, and to combat academic misconduct, the Journal of Inner Mongolia University of Science & Technology. adheres to recognized publishing ethics norms. The editors, authors, and reviewers of this journal should fulfill the following responsibilities:

1 Responsibilities of Editors

1) Editors should handle every manuscript fairly and impartially, making decisions to accept or reject based on the scope of the journal, the novelty, and academic value of the manuscript. They should promptly register manuscripts that pass the initial review, send them for review, and edit and publish those that pass the final review.

2) During the editing and publishing process, editors should adhere to publishing standards while respecting the author's viewpoints and writing style. Any key modifications to academic content must be agreed upon by the author.

3) Strictly implement the “three reviews and three proofreads” system, using a single-blind peer review system and maintaining authentic review records. Editors have the obligation to maintain confidentiality regarding information about authors and reviewers, the research results of authors, and intermediate materials related to the handling of manuscripts.

2 Responsibilities of Authors

1) Authors must not submit identical manuscripts to more than one journal simultaneously nor publish manuscripts describing the same research results in multiple journals.

2) Manuscripts should comply with the relevant requirements stated in the “ Instructions for Authors” of this journal. Ensure the manuscript is an original work free from plagiarism, data fabrication, or other forms of academic misconduct, and does not contain any confidential information. Authors should confirm all sources of data used in the research and properly cite and acknowledge any scholarly work referred to in the text.

3) All named authors must meet the criteria for authorship as required by the journal and should not be added or removed arbitrarily.

4) Clearly state any funding information relevant to the study in the manuscript and avoid mentioning unrelated funding sources.

5) Authors should respect the review opinions of experts. If there are disagreements with the review opinions or results, they can submit a written appeal
to the editorial office, providing detailed explanations for each point of contention.

3 Responsibilities of Reviewers

1) Reviewers should complete the review of the manuscript in a timely manner as agreed; if unable to do so, they should promptly inform the editorial office and return the manuscript.

2) Reviews must be objective, fair, scientific, and accurate, expressing opinions through evidence-based arguments.

3) Reviewers must maintain confidentiality regarding the contents of the manuscript and refrain from unauthorized use of the author’s research results.

4) Reviewers should verify the sources of all data and figures in the manuscript and inform the editor if they detect plagiarism or multiple submissions.

5) When there is a conflict of interest between the reviewer and the manuscript's author, the funding body, or other associated parties, the reviewer should actively recuse themselves from reviewing the manuscript.

4 Rejection, Withdrawal, and Corrections

1) During the manuscript processing, editors should conduct two rounds of academic misconduct detection: once before sending the manuscript for blind review to ensure the content has not been previously published (including conference papers, journal articles, and theses); another time before the final review to reconfirm the same.

2) If during peer review it is found that the manuscript is similar to already published work or may constitute duplicate publication due to the same data and figures, the editorial office should reject the manuscript.

3) After priority publication or print release, if the article is confirmed to involve plagiarism, data falsification, or breaches of confidentiality, the editorial office should withdraw the article, including issuing a withdrawal notice, informing the author and their institution, requesting relevant databases to delete the online version, and halting the dissemination of the paper.

4) If part of the content in the publication is proven misleading (especially due to honest errors), or if the list of authors is incorrect (e.g., competent authors are overlooked or those who do not meet copyright criteria are included), the editorial office should consider issuing a correction.