Publication ethics at PaperNova

The PaperNova editorial team has full authority over content decisions. No advertiser, funder, or external stakeholder influences whether a paper is published.

Editorial decisions are based on the quality, originality, and relevance of the submitted work. Authors are notified of the outcome — accepted, revision requested, or rejected — with clear reasoning.

Every submission goes through a structured editorial review before a decision is made:

1. Initial check. The submission is checked for scope, completeness, and minimum quality — structure, originality, and adequate length.
2. Editorial review. The paper is assessed for clarity, logical structure, and originality of contribution. Automated plagiarism and AI-content screening is run on every paper.
3. Decision. One of three outcomes: accept, revision requested, or reject. Revision requests include specific feedback and a 3-day resubmission window.
4. Publication. Accepted papers are published with a permanent URL, citation block, Google Scholar indexation, and a verifiable certificate of publication.

We aim to return a first decision within 24 hours for most submissions. Authors are notified if review will take longer.

All listed authors must have made a genuine contribution to the work. Specifically, each author should have:

• Made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, or execution of the work
• Drafted or critically revised the paper for intellectual content
• Approved the final version submitted for publication

Honorary, guest, or ghost authorship is not permitted and is grounds for retraction if discovered after publication. The submitting author is responsible for ensuring all co-authors have approved the submission.

Every submitted paper is screened for similarity using our integrated plagiarism detection tool. Authors also self-declare originality at submission and retain legal responsibility for that claim.

Similarity thresholds used in editorial decisions:

• Under 15%: acceptable. Proceeds to review.
• 15%–30%: flagged for editorial review. Authors may be asked to revise.
• Over 30%: desk rejected unless the overlap is clearly from the author's own cited prior work.

Paraphrasing without attribution and recycling of one's own previously published work without citation are both treated as plagiarism.

Authors must disclose any use of generative AI tools in the preparation of their paper.

• Permitted: AI tools used for grammar, spelling, paraphrasing, or reference formatting.
• Permitted with disclosure: AI used to draft sections of the paper. Include a brief disclosure statement describing the tool and how it was used.
• Not permitted: listing an AI system as an author.
• Not permitted: fabricating data, citations, or results using AI. Discovery leads to retraction.

Every submission is screened for AI-generated content. Papers with a high AI-content score undergo additional editorial review before a decision is made.

Authors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationship that could influence their work. This includes funding sources, employment, and any commercial interest in the subject matter.

Undisclosed conflicts discovered after publication may result in a correction notice or retraction depending on the severity.

A paper is retracted when there is clear evidence the findings are unreliable due to:

• Major error or experimental flaw
• Fabrication or falsification of data
• Plagiarism or duplicate publication
• Serious ethical violation

Retracted papers are not removed from the archive. A clearly visible retraction notice is placed on the paper page, and the original version is preserved for the record.

Corrections

For minor issues — typographical errors, missing citations, incorrect figures — we issue a correction notice linked to the paper. A revised version is published and marked as such; earlier versions remain accessible.

To report an error in a published paper, email editorial@papernova.online. We investigate every report in coordination with the authors.

Authors who believe their paper was rejected unfairly may submit an appeal by emailing editorial@papernova.online with the subject line "Appeal: <paper title>". Appeals should include:

• The paper title and submission ID
• A clear explanation of why you believe the decision was incorrect
• Any additional context or evidence relevant to the review

We aim to respond to all appeals within 10 business days.

Authors retain the copyright to their work. By submitting, authors grant PaperNova a non-exclusive right to publish, archive, and distribute the paper.

Papers are published with open-access reading rights — anyone can read and share a link to the paper. Third-party content (figures, tables, quotations) must be properly attributed and used within the terms of the original licence. It is the author's responsibility to secure any necessary permissions before submission.