Ethical Standards for Publication of International Journal ofFluid Machinery and Systems
Preface
The International Journal of Fluid Machinery and Systems (IJFMS) was established under
the cooperation of Korean Society for Fluid Machinery (KSFM),Turbomachinery Society ofJapan (TSJ), Chinese Society of Engineering Thermophysics (CSET), and IAHR Section on
Hydraulic Machinery and Systems (IAHR), the International Association of HydraulicEngineering and Research to serve the engineering community through dissemination of newtechnology and ideas concerning all types of fluid machinery and related systems. For thisservice, keeping high level of ethical standards of editors, authors, and reviewers is essential.
The ethical standards that follow reflect a conviction that the observance of high ethicalstandards is so vital to the whole engineering and scientific enterprise that a definition of
those standards should be brought to the attention of all concerned.

Ethical Standards
A. Obligations of Editors-in-Chief and Associate Editors*
1. The Editor-in Chief has complete responsibility and authority to accept a submitted paper
for publication or to reject it. The Editor-in-Chief may delegate this responsibility to
Associate Editors, who may confer with reviewers for an evaluation to use in making thisdecision.
2. The Editor (Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor) will give unbiased and impartial
consideration to all manuscripts offered for publication, judging each on its scientific andengineering merits without regard to race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin,citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s).
3. The Editor should process manuscripts promptly.
4. The Editor and the editorial staff will not disclose any information about a manuscript
under or its disposition to anyone other than those from whom professional advice issought. The names of reviewers will not be released without the reviewer’s permission.
5. The Editor will respect the intellectual independence of authors.
6. An Editor should delegate the editorial responsibility of submitted manuscripts to other
Editor when the manuscript is found to be authored or co-authored by a person with whomthe Editor has personal or professional connection and the relationship would bias
judgment.
7. Unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations disclosed in a submitted
manuscript must not be used in the research of an Editor and reviewer or disclosed to thethird person except with the consent of the author.
8. If an Editor is presented with convincing evidence that the main substance or conclusionsof a paper published in the journal are erroneous, the Editor must facilitate publication ofan appropriate paper or technical comment pointing out the error and, if possible,correcting it.

B. Obligations of Authors
1. An author’s central obligation is to present a concise, accurate account of the research
performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
2. A paper should contain sufficient detail and reference to public sources of informationsuch that the author’s peers could repeat the work.
3. An author should cite those publications that have been influential in determining thenature of the reported work and that will guide the reader quickly to the earlier work that isessential for understanding the present investigation.
4. An author should ensure that the paper is free of plagiarism and falsified research data.
Plagiarism is defined as the use or presentation of the ideas, intellectual property including
data or interpretation, or words of another person from an existing source without
appropriate acknowledgement to that source.
5. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion withthird parties, should not be used or reported in the author’s work without explicit
permission from the investigator with whom the information is originated. Information
obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grantapplications, should be treated similarly.
6. Fragmentation of research papers should be avoided. A scientist who has done extensive
work on a system or group of related systems should organize publication so that each
paper gives a complete account of a particular aspect of the general study.
7. It is inappropriate for the author to submit manuscripts describing essentially the same
research to more than one journal of primary publication.
8. An accurate, non-trivial criticism of the content of a published paper is justified; however,in no case is personal criticism considered to be appropriate.
9. To protect the integrity of authorship, only persons who have significantly contributed to
the research and paper presentation should be listed as authors, on the responsibility of thecorresponding author. The corresponding author attests to the fact that any others named asauthors have seen the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission forpublication.
10. It is inappropriate to submit manuscripts with an obvious marketing orientation.
11. It is the responsibility of the author to obtain any required government or company
reviews and/or clearances of their paper prior to submission, as well as any necessary
reprinting permission.

C. Obligations of Reviewers of Manuscripts
1. Inasmuch as the reviewing of manuscripts is an essential step in the publication process,every publishing engineer and scientists has an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
2. A chosen reviewer who feels inadequately qualified or lacks the time to judge the research
reported in a manuscript should return it promptly to the Editor.
3. A reviewer of a manuscript should judge the quality of the manuscript objectively andrespect the intellectual independence of the authors. In no case is personal criticism
appropriate.
4. A reviewer should be sensitive even to the appearance of a conflict of interest. If in doubt,
the reviewer should return the manuscript promptly without review, advising the Editor of
the conflict of interest or bias.
5. A reviewer should not evaluate a manuscript authored or co-authored by a person withwhom the reviewer has a personal or professional connection if the relationship would bias
judgment of the manuscript.
6. A reviewer should treat a manuscript sent for review as a confidential document. Its
contents, as well as the reviewer’s recommendations, should neither be shown to nor
discussed with others except, in special cases, to persons from whom specific advice may
be thought; in that event, the identities of those consulted should be disclosed to the Editor.
7. A reviewer should explain and support judgments adequately so that Editors and authors
may understand the basis of the comments. Any statement that an observation, derivationor argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.
8. A reviewer should be alert to failure of authors to cite relevant work by other scientists. A

reviewer should call to the Editor’s attention any substantial similarity between themanuscript under consideration and the references or any published paper or any
manuscript submitted concurrently to another journal.
9. A reviewer should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, orinterpretations contained in a manuscript under consideration, except with the consent ofthe author.

Acknowledgements
Many of the articles of the present Ethical Standard for IJFMS are adapted from thosepublished from American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) and American
Society for Mechanical Engineers (ASME), and are used under their permission.