Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

BIT Journal (Budi Luhur Information Technology) is intended as a study medium
scientific results of research, thought and analysis-critical studies regarding Engineering research
Systems, Informatics Engineering / Information Technology, Information Management and Systems
Information. As part of th>e spirit of disseminating knowledge from the results
research and thinking for service to the wider community and as a source
reference to academics in the field of Technology and Information


BIT Journal (Budi Luhur Information Technology) accepts scientific articles with scope research on:
1. System Engineering
2. Expert System
3. Decision Support Systems
4. Data Mining
5. Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence)
6. Computer Network
7. Computer Engineering
8. Image Processing
9. Genetic Algorithms
10. Designing Information Systems
11. Business Intelligence and Knowledge Management
12. Database System
13. Big Data
14. Energy Management
15. Enterprise Computing
16. ICT and Islam
17. Technology Management
18. Other relevant study topics

With articles that have primary citation and have never been published online or the previous printed version. 

Every article entered before being published will go through the process of Check Plagiarism through the tool help plagiarisma.net. If major plagiarism is indicated, the Manuscript is rejected for publication.

"LET'S START THE QUALITY PUBLICATION"

 

Section Policies

Artikel Rekayasa Sistem Informasi

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Artikel Teknologi Informasi

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

The BIT Journal applies the policy of the review / review process as follows :



  1. The script sent by the author, will pass the review process by the editor, especially checking the suitability of the text with the scope of the journal and its conformity with Journal template. In this process, the editor will establish communication with the author
    so that the text is feasible to be sent to reviewers or even returned / decline.

  2. Manuscripts that have passed step 1 above are sent to 2 reviewers
    for review of the content using the blind review method.

  3. The review process will consider the novelty, objectivity, method, impact
    scientific, conclusions, and references.

  4. Reviewers will suggest improvements and / or accept / reject articles.

  5. The editor will decide by considering the advice of the reviewer
    the script meets the requirements of the BIT Journal.

  6. The editor's decision is final.


BIT Journal (Budi Luhur Information Technology) is a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the publication of quality research results in the field of Engineering Information Systems and Technology but are not implicitly limited. Journal publishes periodically three times a year, namely in January, May and September. Journal published by the Faculty of Information Technology, Budi Luhur University. All publications in the journal BIT open, allowing articles to be freely available online without subscribe.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics

BIT (Budi Luhur Information Technology) is a journal aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and an authoritative source of information. We publish original research papers, review articles and case studies focused on mechatronics, electrical power, and vehicular technology as well as related topics that has neither been published elsewhere in any language, nor is it under review for publication anywhere. This following statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher (Universitas Budi Luhur). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.


 Duties of Authors



  1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.

  2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.

  3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced

  4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

  5. Authorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.

  6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

  8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.


 Duties of Editor



  1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.

  2. Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

  3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.

  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.

  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest


 Duties of Reviewers



  1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

  2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.

  3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work

  4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.  Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.

  5. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

 

Screening For Plagiarism

To avoid Plagiarism Faculty of Information Technology using unicheck as a tool to check Journal