enter search term and/or author name
Reviewers should be independent and should accept to review a paper only in the absence of any conflict of interest. Types of conflict of interests include: belonging to the same institution or research group of the author(s), having collaborated with the authors in the past 3 years, being relatives or personal friends of the author(s), being in a situation in which the reviewer would take some personal or professional advantage in accepting or rejecting the paper, as well as any other situation that would prevent the reviewer to judge the quality of a paper in purely scientific and technological terms.
TAAS does not have a pre-defined review form. Referees will be asked to thoroughly analyse the paper and report on: relevance to the journal, originality, clarity, technical soundness, quality of reported results, appropriateness of references and of related work. In addition, reviewers should provide suggestions about how the author(s) can improve the paper. Eventually, reviewers should suggest to the TAAS editor one of the following actions: reject the paper, accept after a major revision, accept after a minor revision or accept without any changes.
TAAS tries to enforce a very quick review process.
The EICs will commit to assign a paper to an AE within two weeks from its reception. The AE must commit to send back his/her report to the EICs within three months from the original reception of the paper. Reviewers must commit to send back reviews to the AE within six weeks.
Although the editorial board cannot prevent unforeseen delays in the above process, papers submitted to TAAS are expected to receive a notice about the outcome of the review process within four months.
The average number of days form submission to decision is around 80 days (Sep'2013 - Sep'2014).
For more information on specific topics, see the ACM publications policies.