Thermo-X is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and quality. The editorial process is designed to ensure that all submissions are thoroughly reviewed, fairly evaluated, and promptly processed. The followings are the detailed editorial process:

Submission

After preparing manuscripts according to the journal's author instructions, authors should submit their manuscript through the journal's online submission system IntelliManus, following the prompts to fill in all necessary information.
Authors are encouraged to suggest potential reviewers who do not have conflicts of interest when submitting their manuscript; however, the final decision on their inclusion rests with the Editor. To aid in verifying reviewer identities, authors can provide institutional email addresses or identifiers such as ORCID or Scopus IDs. Authors may request the exclusion of up to three researchers, which the Editorial Office will carefully consider. If more than three exclusions are desired, an explanation or justification should be provided to help the Editors determine whether to honor the request.

Initial Check

The initial check includes both the Editorial Office review and the Academic Editor review:
Editorial Office review:
The Editorial Office conducts an initial check to ensure that the manuscript meets the basic requirements and submission guidelines of the journal. The check typically includes:
- Assessing whether the manuscript fits the journal's scope.
- Checking the similarity rate (iThenticate) and whether the format adheres to the journal's requirements.
- Verifying the inclusion of all necessary documents and information, such as ethical approval, figures, etc.
Academic Editor review:
Academic Editor (Editor-in-Chief/Associate Editor/Guest Editor) without conflicts of interest with the author(s) will review the manuscript to determine if it fits the journal's aims and scope and to evaluate the originality and academic value of the manuscript. The possible outcomes of the review include:
- Accepting the manuscript to proceed to the peer review stage.
- Rejecting the manuscript, usually with a brief explanation for the rejection.
- Returning the manuscript to the author(s) for initial revisions, requiring the author(s) to make necessary improvements before resubmission.

Peer Review

Once a submitted manuscript passes initial check, the Editorial Office will invite scholars in the relevant field to serve as peer reviewers. Peer review is conducted in a single-blind manner, where the reviewers know the identity of the authors, but the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. Typically involving evaluation by at least two independent reviewers for each article. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on originality, significance, methodology, clarity, and relevance. Additional invitations may be extended as needed to ensure the required number of qualified reports.

Editorial Assessment

The Editorial Office will conduct a comprehensive assessment on reviewers' comments. In cases of significant ambiguity in the review results, additional reviewers may be invited, or the Editor-in-Chief/Associate Editor without conflicts of interest may make a first decision to ensure a thorough evaluation.
Typically, there are four possible decisions at this stage:
Accept: Accept as is. The paper is accepted without any modifications or with only minor editorial changes.
Minor Revisions: The paper requires minor revisions, such as clarifications, language polishing, or minor additions that do not affect the main conclusions of the study.
Major Revisions: The paper needs significant revisions, such as additional experiments, re-analysis of data, or substantial improvements to the methodology. The revised paper will need to be resubmitted and may undergo another round of peer review.
Reject
Reject: The paper does not meet the journal's standards or has significant flaws, and therefore, the editor decides to reject it. It is not eligible for resubmission.
Reject and resubmit: The paper shows potential but requires substantial revisions and improvements. Authors are encouraged to revise extensively and resubmit. The resubmitted paper will be treated as a new submission and undergo peer review again.
These decisions ensure that published papers meet high academic and research standards, promoting scholarly exchange and advancement of knowledge. For more information, please refer to Peer Review Guidelines.

Revision

During the revision, authors are required to pay attention to the following aspects:

● Careful review of reviewer comments: Thoroughly read all reviewer comments and suggestions, understanding their feedback and concerns.
● Addressing each reviewer comment: In the revised manuscript, address each reviewer comment individually, explaining the changes made or reasons for not adopting certain suggestions.
● Clear marking of revised sections: Clearly indicate all modified parts in the manuscript, typically using highlighting or different colored text, to help editors and reviewers quickly locate changes.
● Maintaining consistency in the paper: Ensure that the logical structure and coherence of the paper are not compromised during revisions. All modifications should enhance clarity and rigor.
● Adding and updating references: Based on reviewer suggestions, it may be necessary to add new references or update existing ones to include the latest research findings.
● Proofreading language and format: Double-check the language and format of the paper to ensure there are no grammar errors or formatting issues.
● Timely submission of revised manuscript: Ensure the revised manuscript is submitted within the specified timeline. If more time is needed, communicate early with the Editorial Office to request an extension.
● Maintaining communication with the Editorial Office: During the revision process, promptly contact the Editorial Office or reviewers if there are any uncertainties or questions, seeking further guidance and clarification.

By adhering to these guidelines, authors can enhance the quality of their revised manuscripts. The revised manuscripts will undergo re-evaluation by the reviewers to ensure that their concerns have been effectively addressed, which may involve multiple rounds of revisions. However, if persistent issues remain unresolved even after several rounds of revision, the manuscripts may still face the possibility of rejection.

Editor's Decision

After peer-review or after revisions, the Academic Editor (Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors) will make a decision on the manuscripts: Accept, Revisions or Reject.
The editorial team maintains the journal's reputation and the readers' trust in its content by adhering to strict standards.
Note: Members of Editorial Board do not handle their own submissions. These submissions undergo a rigorous double-blind peer-review process, reviewed by at least two independent reviewers. Final decisions are made double-blind by anonymous members of Editorial Board who have no conflicts of interest with the authors. And the Editorial Board members must disclose their roles in the journal in the Conflict of Interests section.
For Special Issue manuscripts, Guest Editor could make recommendations in the process of initial check and Editor's decision, but the final decision rests with the member of Editorial Board. More information could be found at Special Issue Guidelines.

Production

Once your manuscript is formally accepted, you will receive an acceptance letter, and a license to publish will be required. Your manuscript will then proceed through language editing, copy editing, and typesetting stages. After typesetting, a proof will be sent to you for review. Please make all necessary changes directly on the proof. Detailed instructions for corrections will be provided via email, and we request that you complete the proofreading within 24 hours. Your article will be published only after we receive your confirmation of satisfaction with the proof.

Article Processing Charge

The journal adopts open access publishing model. When a paper is accepted for publication, authors or their institutions need to pay Article Processing Charges (APCs) to cover the following costs:
● Peer review: Organizing and managing the review process to ensure the quality and scientific validity of the article.
● Editing and formatting: Editing and formatting the article to meet publication standards.
● Digital archiving and publication: Archiving and publishing the article online, making it widely accessible and citable.
● Copyright and licensing management: Managing copyrights and licenses to ensure the article can be freely accessed and used.
● Platform maintenance: Maintaining and updating the online publishing platform to ensure its proper functioning and user experience.

APCs are usually paid by the authors or their institutions or funding bodies. Until the end of 2028, all APCs will be covered by the publisher Science Exploration Press. For more details, please refer to the Science Exploration Article Processing Charges.

Open Access Policy

The journal is an open access journal where all content is freely accessible to users and their institutions without any charges. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, link to the full texts of articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose without needing prior permission from the publisher or author.

Licensing and Copyright

The journal is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Authors retain the copyright of their work and agree to make their original works freely available for use, copying, and redistribution in all formats without needing permission, provided that proper citation is given to the authors and the original source.

Post Publication

The journal encourages discussions and welcomes commentaries on published articles. Any corrections, retractions, appeals or complaints will be handled according to the journal's Editorial Policies.
For any inquiries regarding the editorial process, please contact our Editorial Office: thermo-x@sciexplor.com.