1. 1 Reporting Standards and Originality

   Authors must present an accurate account of their research. Data fabrication, falsification, and other unethical practices are strictly prohibited. Submitted manuscripts must be the original work of the author(s) and must not contain any form of plagiarism.

2. 2 Manuscript Originality and Multiple Submissions

   Manuscripts submitted to JSBMM must not be under consideration by or previously published in any other journal. Simultaneous submission to multiple journals constitutes a serious ethical violation.

   Note: If based on a conference paper or preprint, authors must disclose this and ensure at least 30% new content.
3. 3 Authorship and Contributorship

   Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to: (a) conception and design; (b) drafting or critical revision; (c) final approval; and (d) accountability for all aspects of the work.

4. 4 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

   Authors must openly disclose any potential conflicts of interest—financial or non-financial—that could influence the results or interpretation of their research.

5. 5 Acknowledgment of Sources

   Authors must properly acknowledge and cite all works that influenced their research. Use of others' words, data, or ideas must be appropriately cited.

6. 6 Errors in Published Works

   If authors discover significant errors in their published work, they must promptly notify the editor and cooperate in issuing corrections, retractions, or errata statements.

1. 1 Fairness and Impartiality

   Editors evaluate manuscripts based on intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political affiliation.

2. 2 Confidentiality

   Editors must maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and must not disclose information to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and editorial board members.

3. 3 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

   Editors must not be involved in processing manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest. In such situations, they must delegate handling to another editor.

4. 4 Peer Review Oversight

   Editors are responsible for ensuring that the peer review process is fair, impartial, and timely. Editors should select reviewers with appropriate expertise and avoid reviewers with potential conflicts of interest.

1. 1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

   Peer review assists editors in making decisions and helps authors improve manuscript quality. Reviewers must respond to invitations promptly or notify the editor immediately if they cannot undertake the review.

2. 2 Timeliness and Professionalism

   Reviewers who feel unqualified or cannot complete the review within the stipulated time must immediately notify the editor and decline. Reviewers must provide objective, constructive criticism.

3. 3 Confidentiality

   All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not discuss manuscripts with any third party without editor authorization.

4. 4 Objectivity Standards

   Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism is inappropriate. Reviewers should express views clearly, supported by scientific arguments and references.

5. 5 Acknowledgment of Sources

   Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited and alert editors to any substantial similarity or overlap with other published works.

6. 6 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

   Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from the review process if necessary.

1. 1 Commitment to Open Access

   As an open-access journal under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, PT. Gammabeta Edu and Tech ensures all articles are freely accessible worldwide.

2. 2 Support for Editorial Independence

   The publisher supports the independence of editors in making editorial decisions and will not interfere in decisions based on scientific and ethical considerations.

3. 3 Digital Archiving and Preservation

   The publisher ensures long-term availability of all published articles through digital archiving systems and collaboration with preservation agencies.

4. 4 Handling Ethical Violations

   The publisher, together with editors, will take appropriate action when ethical violations are identified, including clarification requests, corrections, retractions, or prohibition of authors.

JSBMM has clear procedures for handling complaints related to publication ethics. Complaints can be submitted via email to admin@gammabeta.id and will be processed as follows:

1. 1 Acknowledgment: Complaints will be acknowledged within 7 working days.
2. 2 Investigation: The editorial team will investigate thoroughly, maintaining confidentiality.
3. 3 Resolution: Appropriate actions will be taken based on investigation findings.
4. 4 Outcome Communication: The complainant will be informed of the outcome and actions taken.

JSBMM takes plagiarism seriously. All submitted manuscripts will be screened using plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts with significant plagiarism (above 20% similarity, or any instance of direct copying without proper attribution) will be rejected immediately. In cases of alleged plagiarism in published articles, the journal will investigate and take appropriate action in accordance with COPE guidelines.

JSBMM encourages authors to share the data and code underlying their research to enhance transparency and reproducibility. Authors may include a Data Availability Statement indicating whether and how data can be accessed. For mathematical modeling studies, authors are encouraged to provide model code or detailed pseudocode when possible.

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a detailed appeal letter to admin@gammabeta.id. Appeals should clearly state the reasons for contesting the decision and address all reviewer comments. The editorial board will evaluate appeals and render a final decision, which may involve consultation with additional reviewers.