Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Smart Comp is a periodical scientific journal published by Center for Research and Community Service  Politeknik Harapan Bersama and managed by DIII Computer Engineering, Politeknik Harapan Bersama and published 4 (four) times in the season that is January, April, July and October.

Topics cover areas (but not limited to): 

1. Computer Engineering

  • Internet of Things (IoT)
  • Embedded System
  • Mobile Application
  • Network Protocol and Management
  • Robotic
  • Computer Security
  • Information Security and Privacy
  • Network Security
  • Protection Systems


2. Informatic Engineering   
  • Software Engineering
  • Soft Computing
  • Data Mining
  • Information Retrieval
  • Multimedia Technology
  • Mobile Computing
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Games Programming
  • Computer Vision
  • Image Processing
  • Augmented or Virtual Reality
  • Image Processing


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Every article that goes to the editorial staff will be selected through Initial Review processes by Editorial Board. Then, the articles will be sent to the Mitra Bestari/ peer reviewer and will go to the next selection by Blind peer review Process. After that, the articles will be returned to the authors to revise. These processes take a month for a maximum time. In the each manuscript, Mitra Bestari/ peer reviewer will be rated from the substantial and technical aspects. Peer reviewer that collaboration with Smart Comp is the experts in the computer science area and issues around it. They were experienced in the prestigious journal management and publication that was spread around the national and abroad.

Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)

  1. The author submits the manuscript via OJS
  2. The editor will pre-review the manuscript, if everything is good, the editor will send the manuscript to the reviewers (1 week)
  3. If the manuscript has been reviewed, and the manuscript is good, the reviewer will give suggestions to the editor to accept the submission (2 weeks)
  4. The manuscript needs revision 
  5. The editor will send notification to the author regarding revisions via OJS and email (2 days)
  6. The author will revise and resend the manuscript via OJS (2 weeks)
  7. The editor will send the author's revisions to the reviewer (2 days)
  8. If the manuscript has been reviewed and the manuscript is not good, the reviewer will advise the editor to reject the submission (2 weeks)
  9. The editor will make the decision to Refuse Submission to the author (2 days)
  10. If the reviewer makes a recommendation to accept the submission, the editor will notify the author to charge the publication fee (1 day)
  11. The author will make payment and will confirm it with the editor (7 days)
  12. The editorial team will accept submissions via OJS (1 day)
  13. Accept Submission notification will be sent to the Author via OJS (2 days)
  14. Manuscript in production process (3 days)
  15. Manuscript Published


Publication Frequency

Smartcomp is a peer-reviewed journal published four times a year (January, April, July and October), where each issue will be published every 20th.


Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. The published articles will be available in OJS Smart Comp and their full text can be download freely.


Screening For Plagiarism

Turnitin is used as a tool to check plagiarism were the results of checking plagiarism in Smart Comp: Jurnalnya Orang Pintar Komputer with a tolerance of lower than 20%. The full-text of each article submitted will be checked and returned back to the author if the Turnitin results are > 20%. Then the author is required to revise it until the Turnitin results are < 20%. The duration of checking is only done twice for each article submitted.


Publication Ethics

Duties of Authors
1. Reporting Standards:
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

2. Data Access and Retention:
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3. Originality and Plagiarism: 
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication:
An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

5. Acknowledgement of Sources:
Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

6. Authorship of the Paper:
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another 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.

8. Fundamental errors in published works:
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

9. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects:
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Duties of Editors
1. Fair Play: 
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2. Confidentiality: 
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: 
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

4. Publication Decisions
The editor board journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. 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.

5. Review of Manuscripts: 
The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organise 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. The 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.

Duties of Reviewers
1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions:
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

2. Promptness: 
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process

3. Standards of Objectivity: 
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

4. Confidentiality: 
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

5. 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.

6. Acknowledgement of Sources: 
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. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.



Copyright Form

1. The author is required to send the signed Copyright Form. 
2. Scan in PDF format 
3. Send the scanned form as a supplementary file at the time of article submission


If you have question please contact us: