Peer review declaration

Abstract

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.● Type of peer review: Double-blindThe review process at The International Symposium of Geoscience, Oil & Gas Engineering, Sustainable and Environmental Technology (GEOSOSTEK 2020) has used a double-blind process. This process has used the EDAS conference management system (edas.info). First, we checked the template suitability of the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. If it doesn’t match the template then we will return it. Second, the stage of checking the plagiarism of incoming papers has been provided by EDAS using docoloc. If the plagiarism is very high then we will reject it directly, on the other hand, if the plagiarism is low (using threshold 30) then we will continue to be reviewed by 3 reviewers. The status of being accepted or rejected for this stage depends on the assessment of the three reviewers. We also check the similarity plagiarism using Turnitin before these papers would be submitted to the IOP.● Conference submission management system: EDAS conference management system (https://edas.info)● Number of submissions received: 82 papers● Number of submissions sent for review: 82 papers● Number of submissions accepted: 48 papers● Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 58.53%● Average number of reviews per paper: 3 reviews per paper● Total number of reviewers involved: 94 reviewers● Any additional info on review process: In this conference, only full papers are accepted for review. After being reviewed, the editor will decide on the status of the paper from the review results of the three reviewers. If more than two reviewers stated that they accepted the paper, the paper would be accepted, on the other hand, if more than two reviewers stated that they rejected the paper, the paper would be rejected. Some review forms used in this conference are,Technical Criteria• Scientific merit: notably scientific rigour, accuracy and correctness.• Clarity of expression; communication of ideas; readability and discussion of concepts.• Sufficient discussion of the context of the work, and suitable referencing.Quality Criteria• Originality: Is the work relevant and novel?• Motivation: Does the problem considered have a sound motivation? All papers should clearly demonstrate the scientific interest of the results.• Repetition: Have significant parts of the manuscript already been published?• Length: Is the content of the work of sufficient scientific interest to justify its length?Presentation Criteria• Title: Is it adequate and appropriate for the content of the paper?• : Does it contain the essential information of the paper? Is it complete? Is it suitable for inclusion by itself in an abstracting service?• Diagrams, figures, tables and captions: Are they essential and clear?• Text and mathematics: Are they brief but still clear? If you recommend shortening, please suggest what should be omitted.• Conclusion: Does the paper contain a carefully written conclusion, summarizing what has been learned and why it is interesting and useful?Before sending those papers to the publisher, the editor checks the suitability of the template, numbering of figures, tables, sections, citations, and others.● Contact person for queries (please include: name, affiliation, institutional email address) Rosyidah Jayanti Vijaya, Hemispheres, info@hemispheres.or.id