The Bulletin of Computer and Data Sciences (BCDS)
1. General Principles
The Bulletin of Computer and Data Sciences (BCDS) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and academic integrity. The journal follows the principles and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and expects all authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher to adhere to these standards.
2. Publication Misconduct
BCDS makes every reasonable effort to detect and prevent publication misconduct, including (but not limited to) fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and redundant publication.
Fabrication: Making up data or results and recording or reporting them as if they were real.
Falsification: Manipulating research materials, processes, equipment, data, or images so that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
Plagiarism: Using another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without appropriate credit, citation, or permission where required.
Redundant (or duplicate) publication: Submitting or publishing a paper that substantially overlaps with previously published work, or submitting the same manuscript to multiple outlets at the same time.
Redundant submission policy:
The manuscript submitted to BCDS must not have been published elsewhere, in whole or in substantial part, nor be under consideration by any other journal at the time of submission.
Authors must not submit their manuscript to another outlet while it is under review at BCDS.
Violations may result in rejection (if still under review) or retraction (if already published). In serious cases, BCDS may inform the authors’ institutions and may decline to consider future submissions from the same authors for a period of time.
BCDS uses similarity-check tools (e.g., services based on Crossref similarity checking) to screen submissions for originality. When misconduct is suspected, editors will act according to relevant COPE guidelines.
3. Responsibilities of Editors and Reviewers
3.1 Review Process
All submissions to BCDS are subject to rigorous peer review. The journal uses structured review forms to make evaluations systematic, fair, and transparent. Reviewers are asked to focus on both the scientific quality of the research and the clarity and completeness of the manuscript, and to provide constructive comments that help authors improve their work.
3.2 Editors’ Responsibilities
Editors of BCDS:
Evaluate manuscripts on the basis of scientific merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
Make decisions without discrimination based on authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, citizenship, or political views.
Consider legal and ethical requirements, including those related to libel, copyright infringement, privacy, and plagiarism.
Maintain confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and associated communications.
Refrain from using unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the explicit written consent of the authors.
Recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest.
3.3 Reviewers’ Responsibilities
Reviewers of BCDS are expected to:
Treat all manuscripts as confidential documents and not share them with others without formal permission from the editor.
Provide objective, fair, and constructive evaluations, avoiding hostile or disrespectful language.
Identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and notify the editor of any significant similarity or overlap with other published or submitted work.
Disclose any conflicts of interest (personal, academic, financial, or institutional) that could affect their impartiality and decline to review when such conflicts exist.
Not use knowledge gained during the review process for personal advantage or to disadvantage others.
BCDS believes that an efficient, fair, and timely editorial and review process benefits both authors and the wider scientific community.
4. Authorship
The list of authors should accurately reflect those who performed the research and contributed substantially to the manuscript.
Authorship is generally based on the following criteria (aligned with ICMJE):
Substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data;
Drafting the article or critically revising it for important intellectual content;
Final approval of the version to be submitted and, if accepted, the version to be published.
All authors must meet all three criteria, and no one who meets these criteria should be omitted.
All multi-authored manuscripts should include an “Author Contributions” section specifying the role of each author.
Submission by the corresponding author implies that all co-authors and any responsible authorities at the authors’ institutions have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to BCDS.
Changes in authorship:
Any request to add, remove, or reorder authors before acceptance must be accompanied by:
(a) a clear explanation of the reason for the change, and
(b) written confirmation (e-mail or letter) from all authors, including those being added or removed, that they agree with the change.Changes to authorship after publication are not normally allowed.
5. Use of AI Tools
BCDS follows COPE’s guidance on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in research and writing.
AI tools (such as large language models, code assistants, or image generators) cannot be listed as authors and do not meet authorship criteria.
If AI tools are used in the preparation of the manuscript (e.g., language polishing, code generation, figure generation), this must be clearly disclosed in the manuscript (e.g., in the Acknowledgements or a dedicated “Use of AI Tools” statement).
Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of any content produced or assisted by AI tools.
6. Conflict of Interest
All authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationships that could inappropriately influence (or be perceived to influence) their work.
Potential conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to:
Employment (recent, current, or anticipated) by an organization that may benefit or be affected by the publication.
Research funding or other financial support from interested organizations.
Personal financial interests such as stocks, shares, consultancy fees, honoraria, or patents related to the work.
Membership or leadership roles in relevant organizations or committees.
Recent collaboration or shared institutional affiliation with the authors (for reviewers/editors).
Close personal relationships (e.g., family, mentor–mentee, supervisor–student) with one or more authors.
All manuscripts must include a “Conflict of Interest” or “Competing Interests” section. If there are no conflicts, authors should explicitly state:
“The authors declare no conflict of interest.”
7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, they must promptly notify the journal’s editorial office and cooperate with the editors to issue a correction or retraction as appropriate.
Readers who identify potential errors are encouraged to contact the editorial office with detailed information so that the matter can be investigated.
8. Post-Publication Corrections
Corrections (Errata / Corrigenda)
BCDS will publish a correction notice if a significant error is identified after publication that affects the scientific interpretation, but does not invalidate the overall results or conclusions.
A correction may be issued, for example, in cases such as:
Errors that significantly affect data interpretation or figures.
Addition or removal of an author (subject to appropriate documentation and approval by the Editor-in-Chief).
Addition or removal of an entire reference that materially affects the context or attribution.
Addition or removal of a significant amount of text in acknowledgments, funding, or back-matter sections.
Once a correction is approved:
The article is updated on the journal website.
A separate Correction notice is published, linked to the original article.
Relevant indexing services are notified so that database records can be updated.
9. Retractions
Articles may be retracted when:
They contain major errors that invalidate the conclusions.
There is clear evidence of fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other serious ethical violations.
The work is found to violate accepted standards of research ethics.
The Editor-in-Chief, often in consultation with the Editorial Board and the publisher, will investigate any retraction request following COPE recommendations. If a retraction is warranted:
The original article will remain available online but will be clearly marked as “RETRACTED” (e.g., via a watermark and a linked Retraction notice).
The Retraction notice will explain the reason(s) for retraction and who requested it (authors, editors, institution, or others).
10. Comments and Critiques
BCDS welcomes scientific comments and critiques that raise substantive concerns about published articles (e.g., methodology, data interpretation, reproducibility).
Reasonable comments may be considered for publication as “Commentaries” or “Letters to the Editor” after editorial screening and, where appropriate, peer review.
Authors of the original paper will typically be invited to submit a formal response.
Both the comment and the response (if accepted) will be published and linked to the original article.
If the concerns raised in the comment are serious and cannot be resolved satisfactorily, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction following COPE guidance.
Comments must focus on the work itself, not on personal criticism of the authors.
11. Funding Disclosure
Authors are required to clearly acknowledge all sources of financial and material support related to the research and/or publication of their article. This should be included in a Funding or Acknowledgements section and may include:
Research grants or project funding (with funder name and grant number, if applicable).
Funding for article preparation, language editing, or technical assistance.
Any support provided for covering publication-related costs (where applicable).
If no specific funding was received, authors should state:
“This research received no external funding.”
For questions related to this policy or ethical concerns, please contact:
Editorial Office – The Bulletin of Computer and Data Sciences (BCDS)
Email: editor@bcds.ch
