All participants involved in the publication process – authors, reviewers, publication committee members, and the conference chair – share the responsibility of upholding ethical principles in research and paper publication. Submitting a paper, reviewing a paper, and making decisions on acceptance or rejection all signify an understanding and commitment to these ethical guidelines.

Author Responsibilities

• Paper Content: Submitted papers must align with the conference's themes, be scientifically sound, well-structured, and adhere to the conference's writing guidelines.
• Originality and Authorship: Papers must be the original work of the submitting authors. Any use of others' work requires clear and proper citation. Authors are ultimately responsible for the accuracy and authenticity of their content.
• Authorship Confirmation: The corresponding author takes responsibility for the paper and ensures all collaborating authors are listed accurately, with no inclusion of non-authors.
• Financial Disclosure: Authors must disclose all sources of financial support for their research.
• Ethical Conduct: Authors must avoid data fabrication or falsification, plagiarism, ghostwriting, submitting misleading material, false attribution, fabricated results, data manipulation, resubmitting previously published papers, and failing to disclose any errors or inaccuracies they discover in their work.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers collaborate with the publication committee to assess the quality, content, and scientific merit of papers. Their goal is to contribute to the overall improvement of submitted work.

• Availability: Reviewers must promptly inform the secretariat of their ability or inability to review an assigned paper.
• Objective Review: Reviews should be based on sound scientific evidence and logical reasoning, avoiding personal opinions or biases. Reviewers should also avoid conflicts of interest and not review papers for personal gain.
• Confidentiality: All information in reviewed papers must be considered confidential.
• Thorough Review: Reviewers are responsible for verifying the accuracy of references, topics, and quotes used in the paper. They should also suggest relevant published research that might have been overlooked by the authors.
• Timely Feedback: If accepting a review assignment, reviewers must provide clear, detailed expert feedback to the publication committee and authors within the designated timeframe. This includes a careful review of references, tables, figures, and other appendices.

Publication Committee Responsibilities

The publication committee ensures the complete confidentiality of papers and authors' personal information for all personnel involved, including the secretariat, scientific committee, and reviewers.

• Decision-Making: Decisions to accept or reject papers are based on a thorough evaluation of reviewers' expert opinions, taking into account the accuracy, scientific evidence, and sound reasoning presented. Personal opinions should not influence these decisions.
• Conflict of Interest: The conference chair and publication committee are responsible for preventing conflicts of interest in the review process. This includes identifying any potential conflicts arising from personal, commercial, academic, or financial relationships that could influence the acceptance or publication of submitted papers.

Further Resources

For additional information on engineering ethics and research ethics principles, please refer to the following resources:

1. Ethical Principles for Research
2. Ethical Principles for Engineers
3. Research Ethics (IEEE Iran Section - Non-Official)

Translated by Al