This page states the ethical obligations of the editors, reviewers, authors and publisher of QAIRU Journal, and the procedure the journal follows when misconduct is alleged.
QAIRU Journal is published by Qazaq AI Research University, Astana, Republic of Kazakhstan.
The journal follows the COPE Code of Conduct (2026) and the COPE Core Practices. Suspected misconduct, whether it concerns an author, a reviewer or an editor, is handled using the relevant COPE flowchart. Where this statement is silent on a situation, the COPE Core Practices apply.
This statement binds four groups: the editors of the journal, its reviewers, the authors who submit to it, and the publisher. Submitting a manuscript, accepting an invitation to review, or accepting an editorial appointment constitutes acceptance of the obligations set out below.
Publication decisions. Editors decide which submitted manuscripts are published. The decision rests on the scholarly merit of the work: the validity of the methods, the strength of the evidence, the significance of the contribution to the field, and the fit with the scope of the journal. Legal requirements on defamation, copyright and plagiarism also constrain the decision. Nothing else does.
Equal treatment. Editors assess manuscripts on their intellectual content, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, citizenship, institutional affiliation, seniority or political views.
Confidentiality. Editors and editorial staff do not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, the reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers and the publisher, and only as required to process the submission.
Use of unpublished material. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript may not be used in an editor's own research without the written consent of the author.
Conflicts of interest and recusal. An editor who has a competing interest in a manuscript, including collaboration, competition, a shared institution, a financial interest or a personal relationship with any author, declares it and takes no part in handling that manuscript. Another editor is appointed to handle it. Manuscripts authored by an editor are handled by an editor with no connection to the work, and the author has no access to the file.
Vigilance and duty to act. Editors act on credible concerns about the conduct of research or publication. A concern is examined even when it is raised years after publication, and even when the authors have since changed institution or the article has been widely cited.
Corrections, retractions and expressions of concern. Editors publish a correction, a retraction or an expression of concern whenever the published record requires it, without delay and without regard to who is affected. The procedures are set out in Corrections and Retractions.
Integrity of the record. Editors safeguard the integrity of what the journal has published, keep the published version and any subsequent notice permanently linked, and do not remove published articles from the record.
Business needs. No commercial, institutional or reputational consideration is permitted to compromise these standards.
Complaints and appeals. Complaints against the journal, its editors or its process are answered in writing under a documented procedure, by an editor who was not involved in the matter complained of. The procedure for appeals against editorial decisions is set out in Peer Review Process and Editorial Policies.
Editorial independence. Editorial decisions are made by the editors alone. The publisher has no role in the assessment or acceptance of any manuscript.
Contribution to the decision and to the manuscript. Review assists the handling editor in reaching a decision and assists the authors in improving the work. Comments are written so that the authors can act on them.
Promptness. An invited reviewer who is not qualified to assess the manuscript, or who cannot return a report within the stated period, declines the invitation promptly so that another reviewer can be found. A reviewer who accepts an invitation returns the report within three weeks.
Confidentiality. A manuscript under review is a confidential document. It must not be shown to, or discussed with, anyone not authorised by the handling editor. It must not be copied, quoted or retained after the report is submitted. It must not be uploaded to a generative AI service or to any other third-party service, in whole or in part, including for language assistance or summarisation. See Generative AI Policy.
Objectivity. Reviews are conducted objectively. Every criticism is supported by an argument. Personal criticism of the author is not acceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources. Reviewers identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited, and inform the handling editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and other work of which they have personal knowledge.
Conflicts of interest. A reviewer with a competing interest arising from collaboration, competition, a shared institution, a financial relationship or a personal connection with any author declines the invitation or withdraws as soon as the conflict becomes apparent. See Conflicts of Interest.
Reporting standards. Authors present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. The description of methods, data and evaluation must be detailed enough for others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute misconduct and are unacceptable.
Originality and plagiarism. Authors submit only work that is entirely their own. Where the work or the words of others have been used, this is cited, and verbatim text is placed in quotation marks with a reference. Plagiarism in any form, including presenting another's paper as the author's own, copying substantial parts of another's work without attribution, and claiming results from research conducted by others, is misconduct. See Plagiarism and Similarity.
Multiple and duplicate submission. A manuscript describing essentially the same research must not be under consideration at more than one journal at a time, and must not have been published elsewhere. Deposit of a preprint is permitted and must be disclosed at submission with the repository name and the identifier of the preprint.
Acknowledgement of sources. Proper acknowledgement of the work of others is required. Authors cite the publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work, including sources of data, datasets, code, models and benchmarks.
Authorship and contributor roles. Authorship is limited to those who meet the criteria set out in Authorship and Contributions. A contributor statement using CRediT roles is required. The corresponding author ensures that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version and have agreed to its submission.
Conflicts of interest and funding. All authors disclose any financial or personal relationship that could be seen to influence the reported work, and all sources of financial support for the project. See Conflicts of Interest.
Generative AI. The use of generative AI tools in producing the manuscript, the code, the figures or the analysis is disclosed as required by the Generative AI Policy. Such tools cannot be authors and cannot bear responsibility for the work.
Data availability and retention. Authors provide a data availability statement, are expected to make the data and code underlying the results available where this is lawful and ethical, and retain the raw data for a reasonable period after publication so that it can be produced if editorial review requires it. See Data Availability.
Ethical oversight. Research involving human participants, their data or their biological material requires approval by a competent ethics committee and the informed consent of the participants; the manuscript names the approving body and states that consent was obtained. Research involving animals requires a statement on compliance with the applicable rules on animal welfare. Work in artificial intelligence carries specific obligations: personal, biometric and location data require a lawful basis and appropriate de-identification; datasets that carry consent restrictions, licence terms or terms of use must be used within those terms, and the manuscript states the provenance and the licence of every dataset used.
Errors after publication. An author who discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published article notifies the editorial office promptly and cooperates in correcting or retracting the article. This obligation applies equally when the error is brought to the author's attention by a third party.
The publisher, Qazaq AI Research University, does not interfere in editorial decisions and takes no part in the assessment, acceptance or rejection of any manuscript. It funds the journal without expectation of favourable treatment for itself, its staff or its partners. It supports the permanent availability of published content and the long-term preservation of the record. See Archiving and Preservation.
How to raise a concern. Concerns are raised in writing to journal@qairu.edu.kz. The message should identify the article or the manuscript, state precisely what is alleged, and supply the evidence, for example the source of duplicated text, the inconsistency in the data, or the earlier publication concerned.
Anonymous allegations. An anonymous allegation is examined on the same basis as a signed one, provided it supplies sufficient evidence to be assessed.
Process. The concern is assessed by an editor with no conflict of interest in the matter, following the applicable COPE flowchart. The authors are informed of the substance of the allegation and are asked to respond within a stated period, with the evidence for their response. Where the response does not resolve the matter, or where no response is received, the journal refers the case to the authors' institution or to another competent body and asks for an investigation. The journal reports the outcome to the parties concerned.
Confidentiality and protection. The matter is treated as confidential on both sides while it is under examination. The identity of a whistle-blower is not disclosed to the authors without that person's consent, and the journal takes no action adverse to a person who raises a concern in good faith, even where the concern is not upheld.
Possible outcomes. Depending on the findings, the outcome may be no further action, a correction, a retraction, an expression of concern, notification of the authors' institution or funder, and a ban on submissions to the journal for a stated period or permanently. Corrections, retractions and expressions of concern are published under Corrections and Retractions.
Copyright in a published article stays with the authors. Articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY 4.0). By submitting, the authors warrant that they hold the rights necessary to publish the work under that licence, that all third-party material reproduced in the article, including figures, tables, datasets, code and model weights, is used with the permission of the rights holder or under terms that permit it, and that every such item is credited in the article. See Licensing and Copyright.
Readers who wish to question a published article write to journal@qairu.edu.kz, identifying the article and the specific claim in dispute. A substantive comment is sent to the corresponding author, who is invited to reply. The editors respond to the reader in writing. Where the exchange indicates that the reliability of the published record is affected, the matter is handled as an allegation of misconduct or under the correction and retraction procedure, and the outcome is published as a notice linked to the article. The journal does not operate an open comment thread; correspondence is handled by the editorial office.
Effective date: 2026-09-01 · Version: 1.0 · Questions: journal@qairu.edu.kz