To strengthen academic ethics in scientific journals, promote research integrity, protect the rights and interests of readers and authors, and uphold the quality and reputation of this journal, Journal of Tianjin University (Science and Technology) will strictly screen and check all submitted manuscripts throughout the editorial and publication process. Manuscripts found to involve academic misconduct will be rejected, and serious measures will be taken depending on the severity of the case.

I. Procedures for Identifying Academic Misconduct

This journal utilizes the CNKI "Academic Misconduct Detection System for Scientific Journals" and relevant search engines to screen manuscripts. We also actively monitor leads arising from the peer-review process. Using the China Academic Journals Full-text Database as the reference source, we check for academic misconduct—such as plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, improper authorship, and simultaneous submission—at every stage of the editorial and publication process. For manuscripts flagged by the system with high similarity rates, the editorial office adopts a prudent approach by inviting experts in the relevant field or members of the editorial board to review and make a final determination.

II. Scope of Manuscripts Subject to Screening

1) All submitted manuscripts, as well as those pending acceptance or already accepted;

2) Manuscripts reported for alleged academic misconduct.

III. Criteria for Identifying Academic Misconduct

The CNKI "Academic Misconduct Detection System for Scientific Journals" is used to check for text similarity. If the similarity rate reaches or exceeds 20%, the editorial office will submit the manuscript—along with the source material—to peer reviewers or the editorial board to determine the nature and form of the overlap. A formal "Report on the Determination and Handling of Manuscript Similarity" will then be prepared.

Criteria for identifying papers involving academic misconduct are as follows:

1) Papers that copy the work of others verbatim or substantially verbatim;

2) Papers where the core content is identical to that of a paper previously published (in print or online) by the author or others, with only superficial changes and lacking substantive research progress;

3) Papers that cite protected ideas, proposals, materials, or data belonging to others without proper attribution or listing of references;

4) Papers containing fabricated or falsified research results, survey data, experimental data, or literature;

5) Papers submitted simultaneously to this journal and other journals;

6) Papers involving disputes regarding authorship, the order of authors, or author affiliations.

IV. Handling of papers identified as involving academic misconduct

1) This journal approaches papers ultimately identified as involving academic misconduct with prudence; authors will be notified promptly and given the opportunity to provide explanations and rebuttals before a decision is made.

2) If the paper has not yet been accepted, the editorial office will immediately terminate the processing, reject the manuscript, and admonish the author.

3) If the paper has been accepted but not yet formally published, the editorial office will reject the manuscript, revoke the acceptance, and place a formal warning on the author's record.

4) If the paper has already been formally published, the editorial office will issue a formal retraction notice in the print edition and on the journal's website, notify partner databases to remove the online version to halt the paper's dissemination, and notify the author's institution of the incident. The editorial office reserves the right to seek compensation for any reputational or other damage caused to the journal.

5) Authors found to have committed serious plagiarism or multiple submissions (where the same paper is submitted to or published in multiple journals) will be barred from submitting any papers to this journal—whether as first author or corresponding author—for a period of three years.

V. Handling of Objections Raised by Authors

If an author disagrees with the journal's determination and handling decision, they may submit a written request for a review to the journal within 10 working days of receiving the notification (requests submitted after this deadline will not be accepted). The editorial office will arrange for experts to re-evaluate the paper, issue a final decision, and notify the author of the re-evaluation result within 30 working days.

The Editorial Office of Journal of Tianjin University is responsible for their interpretation.