Opto-Electronics Review

Guide for Authors

https://www.editorialsystem.com/opelre/journal/for_authors/

OPTO-ELECTRONICS REVIEW is an open access journal. This involves the payment of an article publishing charge (APC) by the authors, their institution or funding body. We make the article freely available immediately upon publication on PAS Jornals platform (https://journals.pan.pl/opelre)

APC: 2000 PLN (500 EUR) - up to 8 pages of the journal format and mandatory over-length charges of 200 PLN (50 EUR) per page (see the above link with instructions for Authors for details)

Opto-Electronics Review was established in 1992 for the publication of scientific papers concerning optoelectronics and photonics materials, system and signal processing. This journal covers the whole field of theory, experimental verification, techniques and instrumentation and brings together, within one journal, contributions from a wide range of disciplines. Papers covering novel topics extending the frontiers in optoelectronics and photonics are very encouraged. The main goal of this magazine is promotion of papers presented by European scientific teams, especially those submitted by important team from Central and Eastern Europe. However, contributions from other parts of the world are by no means excluded.

Articles are published in OPELRE in the following categories:

-invited reviews presenting the current state of the knowledge,

-specialized topics at the forefront of optoelectronics and photonics and their applications,

-refereed research contributions reporting on original scientific or technological achievements,

-conference papers printed in normal issues as invited or contributed papers.

Authors of review papers are encouraged to write articles of relevance to a wide readership including both those established in this field of research and non-specialists working in related areas. Papers considered as “letters” are not published in OPELRE.

Opto-Electronics Review is published quarterly as a journal of the Association of Polish Electrical Engineers (SEP) and Polish Academy of Sciences (PAS) in cooperation with the Military University of Technology and under the auspices of the Polish Optoelectronics Committee of SEP.

Abstracting and Indexing: Arianta BazTech EBSCO relevant databases EBSCO Discovery Service SCOPUS relevant databases ProQuest relevant databases Clarivate Analytics relevant databases WangFang additionally: ProQuesta (Ex Libris, Ulrich, Summon) Google Scholar

DOFINANSOWANO ZE ŚRODKÓW BUDŻETU PAŃSTWA
Rozwój czasopism naukowych
Nr projektu: RCN/SN/0652/2021/1
Dofinansowanie: 85 700 zł
Całkowita wartość: 85 700 zł
Data podpisania umowy: 6 grudnia 2022 r.
Celem projektu jest wsparcie działalności wydawniczej Opto-Electronics Review w zakresie poprawy widoczności czasopisma na arenie krajowej i międzynarodowej oraz podwyższenia jakości edytorskiej prezentowanych treści.

CO-FINANCED FROM THE STATE BUDGET
Development of scientific journals
Project number: RCN/SN/0652/2021/1
Funding: PLN 85 700
Total value: PLN 85 700
Date of signing the contract: December 6, 2022.
The project aims to support the publishing activities of Opto-Electronics Review to improve the journal's visibility in the national and international arena and increase the editorial quality of the presented content.

Policies and ethics:

The editors of the journal place particular emphasis on compliance with the following principles:

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in writing for Opto-Electronics Review

Where authors use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, these technologies should only be used to improve readability and language of the work and not to replace key authoring tasks such as producing scientific insights or drawing scientific conclusions. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control and all work should be reviewed and edited carefully, because AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. The authors are ultimately responsible and accountable for the contents of the work.

Authors should disclose in their manuscript the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies and a statement will appear in the published work. Declaring the use of these technologies supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and contributors and facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant tool or technology.

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in figures, images and artwork

Opto-Electronics Review does not permit the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original.

The only exception is if the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools is part of the research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches to generate or interpret the underlying research data, for example in the field of biomedical imaging). If this is done, such use must be described in a reproducible manner in the methods section. This should include an explanation of how the generative AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the image creation or alteration process, and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer.

Ethical policy of Opto-Electronics Review

The ethical policy of Opto-Electronics Review follows the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity and is also guided by the core practices and policies outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Authors must be honest in presenting their results and conclusions of their research. Research misconduct is harmful for knowledge.

Research results

Fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting of data with the intent to mislead or deceive is unethical, as is the theft of data or research results from others. The results of research should be recorded and maintained to allow for analysis and review. Following publication, the data should be retained for a reasonable period and made available upon request. Exceptions may be appropriate in certain circumstances to preserve privacy, to assure patent protection, or for similar reasons.

Authorship

All those who have made a significant contribution should be given chance to be cited as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the work should be acknowledged. Articles should include a full list of the current institutional affiliations of all authors, both academic and corporate.

Competing interests

All authors, referees and editors must declare any conflicting or competing interests relating to a given article. Competing interests through their potential influence on behavior or content or perception may undermine the objectivity, integrity, or perceived value of publication.

Peer Review

We are committed to prompt evaluation and publication of fully accepted papers in Opto-Electronics Review’s publications. To maintain a high-quality publication, all submissions undergo a rigorous review process.

Characteristics of the peer review process are as follows:

• Simultaneous submissions of the same manuscript to different journals will not be tolerated.

• Manuscripts with contents outside the scope will not be considered for review.

• Opto-Electronics Review is a single-blind review journal.

• Papers will be refereed by at least 2 experts as suggested by the editorial board.

• In addition, Editors will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed. Authors will be informed when Editors decide further review is required.

• All publication decisions are made by the journal’s Editor-in-Chief based on the referees’ reports. Authors of papers that are not accepted are notified promptly.

• All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. We expect reviewers to treat manuscripts as confidential material.

• Editors and reviewers involved in the review process should disclose conflicts of interest resulting from direct competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, and remove oneself from cases in which such conflicts preclude an objective evaluation. Privileged information or ideas that are obtained through peer review must not be used for competitive gain.

• A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should bring these to the attention of the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement, observation, derivation, or argument that had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

• Personal criticism is inappropriate.

Plagiarism

Reproducing text from other papers without properly crediting the source (plagiarism) or producing many papers with almost the same content by the same authors (self-plagiarism) is not acceptable. Submitting the same results to more than one journal concurrently is unethical. Exceptions are the review articles. Authors may not present results obtained by others as if they were their own. Authors should acknowledge the work of others used in their research and cite publications that have influenced the direction and course of their study.

Plagiarism is not tolerated. All manuscripts submitted to Opto-Electronics Review will be checked for plagiarism (copying text or results from other sources) and self-plagiarism (duplicating substantial parts of authors’ own published work without giving the appropriate references) using the CrossCheck database (iThenticate plagiarism checker).

Duplicate submission

Simultaneous submissions of the same manuscript to different journals will not be tolerated. The submitted article will be removed without consideration.

Corrections and retractions

All authors have an obligation to inform and cooperate with journal editors to provide prompt retractions or correction of errors in published works.

• The journal will issue retractions if:

• There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication or honest error - miscalculation or experimental error);

• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication);

• It constitutes plagiarism;

• It reports unethical research.

• The journal will issue errata, if:

• A small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error);

• The author list is incorrect.

Other forms of misconduct include failure to meet clear ethical and legal requirements such as misrepresentation of interests, breach of confidentiality, lack of informed consent and abuse of research subjects or materials. Misconduct also includes improper dealing with infringements, such as attempts to cover up misconduct and reprisals on whistleblowers.

The primary responsibility for handling research misconduct is in the hands of those who employ the researchers. If a possible misconduct is brought to our attention, we will seek advice from the referees and the Editorial Board. If there is the evidence, we will resolve the matter by appropriate corrections in the printed and online journal; by refusing to consider an author's future work and by contacting affected authors and editors of other journals.

Human and Animal Rights

If the work involves the use of human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments involving humans; Uniform Requirements for manuscripts submitted to Biomedical journals. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

All animal experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelines and should be carried out in accordance with the EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments, and the authors should clearly indicate in the manuscript that such guidelines have been followed.

All submitted manuscripts are checked against plagiarism using iThenticate software. Using the CRediT taxonomy in the Authors' Statement section is recommended.(https://credit.niso.org/)

CRediT Classification:
Conceptualization: Ideas; formulation or evolution of overarching research goals and aims.
Data Curation: Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), scrub data and maintain research data (including software code, where it is necessary for interpreting the data itself) for initial use and later reuse.
Formal Analysis: Application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data.
Funding Acquisition: Acquisition of the financial support for the project leading to this publication.
Investigation:; Conducting a research and investigation process, specifically performing the experiments, or data/evidence collection.
Methodology: Development or design of methodology; creation of models.
Project Administration: Management and coordination responsibility for the research activity planning and execution.
Resources: Provision of study materials, reagents, materials, patients, laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources, or other analysis tools.
Software: Programming, software development; designing computer programs; implementation of the computer code and supporting algorithms; testing of existing code components.
Supervision: Oversight and leadership responsibility for the research activity planning and execution, including mentorship external to the core team.
Validation: Verification, whether as a part of the activity or separate, of the overall replication/reproducibility of results/experiments and other research outputs.
Visualization: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically visualization/data presentation.
Writing – Original Draft Preparation: Creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically writing the initial draft (including substantive translation).
Writing – Review & Editing: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work by those from the original research group, specifically critical review, commentary or revision – including pre- or post-publication stages.

An example of an Authors’ Contribution statement using CRediT with degree of contribution:

X.Y.: writing – review and editing (equal). A.B.: conceptualization (lead); writing – original draft (lead); formal analysis (lead); writing – review and editing (equal). C.D.: software (lead); writing – review and editing (equal). M.N.: methodology (lead); writing – review and editing (equal). S.T.: conceptualization (supporting); writing – original draft (supporting); writing – review and editing (equal).