About the Journal

Editorial Policies

1. Focus and Scope

Revista UIS Ingeniería (RUI) is an international, peer-reviewed quarterly publication edited by the schools that comprise the Faculty of Physicomechanical Engineering (including the School of Industrial Design, School of Industrial and Business Studies, School of Civil Engineering, School of Electrical, Electronic and Telecommunications Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, and School of Systems and Computer Engineering) at the Universidad Industrial de Santander (UIS); since 2002, the journal has served as a platform for disseminating original and significant research in engineering and applied sciences, with a focus on materials science, decision sciences, and manufacturing engineering.

The following published documents correspond to the typologies:

- Scientific and technological research article: presents, in detail, the original results of research projects.

- Review article: the results of published research are analyzed, systematized and integrated

- Case report: presents the results of a study on a particular situation in order to present the technical and methodological experiences considered in a specific case.

Memoirs of scientific events are not published.

2. Open Access

This journal offers free and immediate access to its content, adhering to the principle that making research available to the public at no cost facilitates greater global knowledge exchange.

The work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives 4.0 International License; RUI does not charge for article submission, processing, or publication.

All published articles have a unique and permanent identifier for electronic publications DOI (Digital Object Identifier).

3. Declaración de ética y buenas prácticas

This journal offers free and immediate access to its content, adhering to the principle that making research available to the public at no cost facilitates greater global knowledge exchange.

The work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives 4.0 International License;
RUI does not charge for article submission, processing, or publication.

All published articles have a unique and permanent identifier for electronic publications DOI (Digital Object Identifier).

4. Authorship

Authorship involves recognizing a researcher's contributions and assuming associated responsibilities.

4.1. Author contribution credit

RUI promotes the recognition of researchers' contributions in its publications. For this purpose, it has implemented the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT), standardized in 2022 by the National Information Standards Organization (NISO) under standard ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022.

The journal uses the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) to detail the specific contributions of each collaborator; roles and contributions must be clearly described at the end of each document. Academic production includes Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Original Draft Writing, and Review & Editing. For more information, please visit https://credit.niso.org/.

From 2023, the RUI requires authors to include at the end of the document, in a designated section, the roles they played in the research and their contributions to the results, complying with the Contributor Role Taxonomy (ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022). Those who have contributed to the study but do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section.

4.2. Author responsibilities

Authors are responsible for ensuring data integrity, selecting and managing corresponding authors, and obtaining permissions for reused material; all involved authors must approve changes in authorship after submission. It also ensures that the original data on which the research is based are preserved following best practices and are in a condition to be re-analyzed. It also ensures compliance with the conditions outlined in the 'Author Guidelines.'

It is the authors’ responsibility to select and authorize a corresponding author for correction and review purposes, who must register on the Open Journal System (OJS) platform through the following link: http://revistas.uis.edu.co/index.php/revistauisingenierias/user/register, and submit the article in the format established by the RUI, along with the 'Article Presentation Letter and Partial Use License', duly completed and signed by all authors. The person designated as the corresponding author assumes responsibility for ensuring the accuracy of the entire content, including co-authors' names, addresses, and affiliations.

Additionally, when previously published figures are used, the corresponding author must obtain written permission from the authors of the original work or the corresponding editors to reuse such material. The authors of the published article are responsible for notifying the journal immediately if they identify any aspect that requires correction.

4.3. Changes in the list of authors

After the initial submission, any changes, whether removing or adding authors or changing their order, must be approved by all involved authors; once an article has been accepted for publication, NO changes in authorship, including the addition or removal of authors and changes in their order, will be permitted. RUI is not equipped to investigate or resolve authorship disputes before or after publication. If the authors cannot resolve such discrepancies, they should be referred to the relevant authority; for an author who has changed their name for reasons such as gender transition, a name correction can be requested without the need to include it as a note in the article.

4.4. Affiliation

The primary affiliation of each author corresponds to the institution where most of their work was conducted.

4.5. Author Identification

Authors and co-authors of submitted documents are encouraged to provide their Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID). This identifier consists of a free alphanumeric code that uniquely and precisely identifies academic authors. For more information, visit https://orcid.org/.

5. Conflict of Interest

Conflicts of interest, both financial and non-financial, must be transparently declared to maintain the integrity of the publication process; these conflicts can be:

Financial interests: When there are ties to funding, employment, stocks, or ownership in companies whose products or services are discussed in the article and which may stand to gain or lose financially through publication, consulting fees, or other forms of compensation.
Non-financial interests: When there is an unpaid personal or professional relationship that could be related to the publication process.

RUI is a publication with editorial independence; we ensure that decisions and content are not compromised by financial or non-financial interests, nor by any specific agreements with authors, reviewers, editors, and institutions; for RUI, it is fundamental to identify and disclose conflicts of interest transparently to maintain credibility and trust in the integrity of the scientific process. Our policy is to DISCLOSE such agreements when there is any risk that a compromise might be perceived; therefore, we invite authors, reviewers, the editorial team, and other participants in the publication process to indicate "any conflict of interest that, if not declared, could be a cause of embarrassment if made public after the article's disclosure."

5.1. For authors

To promote transparency and impartiality, RUI requires authors to declare any conflict of interest that could influence the perception or objectivity of their articles, whether financial or non-financial; these statements are collected through the "Article Presentation Letter and Partial Use License" and are shared in full by the reviewers. In the article, authors must include a statement at the end of the document indicating whether they have any conflicts of interest, using a section designated by the journal. Additionally, authors whose research is subject to confidentiality agreements must mention this. Below are some sentences that can be used in each case:

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
The authors declare the following competing interests.
The authors declare they are subject to confidentiality agreements that prevent them from disclosing their competing interests in this work.

It is important to note that, in this declaration, authors should not specify the monetary value of their financial interests.

5.2. For reviewers

We request reviewers to inform the editors about any conflicts of interest mentioned above. The reviewers' statement is obtained through the "evaluation form." RUI invites reviewers to abstain from participating in cases where a financial or non-financial conflict of interest could directly or indirectly compromise a publication's objectivity, integrity, and value, influencing the judgments and recommendations expected of a reviewer. However, a reviewer's evaluation that mentions competing interests will not automatically be invalidated; the Editorial Team will consider these statements when evaluating the reviewers' recommendations.

5.3. For the editor, guest editors, editorial team members, and editorial board members

The editor, guest editors, editorial team members, and editorial board members are committed to declaring any competing interests and, in the event of identified conflicts of interest (e.g., having previously published with one or more of the authors of the submitted article, sharing the same institution as one or more of the authors), may be excluded from the editorial process of the specific manuscript; in these cases, another pair will be assigned to take responsibility for overseeing the evaluation process.

Suppose the editor, guest editors, editorial team members, or editorial board members participate as authors of an article submitted to RUI. In that case, they must declare it both in the "Article Presentation Letter and Partial Use License" and in the article section designated for this purpose.

6. Ethics

Authors have the freedom to develop their research and communicate it. At the same time, they have the ethical obligation to ensure intellectual integrity and prevent avoidable harm that may arise in the research development or its communication.

6.1. Ethical principles

In keeping with the general frameworks for ethical research conduct (e.g., the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines by COPE, the Declaration of Helsinki by the World Medical Association, the International Ethical Guidelines for Health-Related Research Involving Humans, Ethics in Social Sciences and Humanities), and to contribute to the construction and advancement of scientific knowledge openly and rigorously, RUI establishes ethical principles that guide its operation:

Social responsibility: RUI is committed to enhancing scientific knowledge and the well-being of society by publishing relevant, significant, and ethically responsible research.
Integrity and honesty: RUI maintains high standards of integrity and honesty in all its processes, including peer review, selection of articles, and publication of research results.
Academic rigor: RUI promotes academic excellence and ensures the quality and validity of the published works through a rigorous peer review process and an impartial evaluation of the manuscripts.
Transparency: RUI is committed to openness and clarity in all aspects of the publication process; this involves fully and accurately disclosing all relevant details, including potential conflicts of interest, funding sources, and other information that may influence the interpretation or evaluation of the results.
Respect for diversity and equity: RUI respects the diversity of approaches, perspectives, and opinions in the academic field and ensures equity in treating authors, reviewers, and readers of different backgrounds and affiliations.
Non-maleficence and beneficence: RUI is guided by ethical principles of not intentionally causing harm to participants (non-maleficence) and maximizing potential benefits outweighing any possible risks or harm (beneficence) to protect the well-being and rights of participants in the research.
Protection of confidentiality: RUI safeguards the confidentiality of information provided by authors and reviewers during the peer review process and ensures the privacy of participants' personal data in the editorial process.

6.2. Risk and benefit

The pursuit of knowledge is an essential public good. In scientific research, it is the responsibility of society's members to recognize both the long-term benefits and risks derived from the advancement of knowledge and progress; for this reason, RUI considers the potential harm that could arise from the publication of a particular article. In cases where a significant risk of harm outweighs any possible benefit, measures such as rejection, retraction, removal, or modification of the publication will be taken following consultation with the editorial board.

6.3. Research involving humans

Research involving human participants must have been conducted by the Declaration of Helsinki's "Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects" and the Belmont Report's "Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research." Authors must declare in the "Article Presentation Letter and Partial Use License" that all procedures followed the relevant guidelines and regulations.

6.3.1. Respect for the rights and dignity of all people and human groups

Articles submitted to the RUI must respect the rights and dignity of all people and human groups. Researchers are asked to consider how their research may affect different groups of people, such as those defined by their genetic ancestry (biological constructs), race/ethnicity (sociopolitical constructs), sex (biological differences between women and men), gender (socially constructed roles and behaviors), gender identity (an individual's conception of themselves as male, female, masculine, feminine, non-binary, ambivalent, etc.), religion, age, or disability; if the authors are not part of the group they are studying, it is important that they include their perspectives and explain how their findings might affect those groups. Authors are also advised to avoid using words that refer to these characteristics unless necessary to understand the text.

RUI reserves the right to request modifications or, in severe cases, reject or retract the publication of any content that, following the evaluation by an internal editorial supervision group, is considered to undermine the dignity and human rights.

6.3.2. Interventional clinical trials

All interventional trials must be registered in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) of the World Health Organization without violating the confidentiality of the participants. In the methodology section, authors must include the registration number and date when the study was registered on the platform.

6.3.3. Ethical approval

In the article, authors must provide, in a dedicated section, the complete identification of the institutional and national ethics research committee that approved the research and the committee's reference number, if applicable, since regulations regarding the need for ethical approval vary worldwide and depend on the type of study, it is important to ensure that local and national ethical requirements are met. In some countries, all studies require ethical approval; in others, it is unnecessary. RUI recommends adhering to the specific ethical regulations of the place where the research was conducted. Additionally, authors are requested to explain in a dedicated section why the study did not require the approval of an ethics committee.

6.3.4. Informed consento

Articles involving human participants (their data, biological material, etc.) must include a statement in a dedicated section affirming that informed consent was obtained from all human participants in the research (in the case of children, from their parents or legal guardians; if the person has passed away, consent for publication must be obtained from their relatives); the editorial team will evaluate Articles where consent may be problematic (e.g., prisoners, unconscious individuals) and may be referred to an editorial supervision group for further examination.

Authors must also attest that the original signed consent form is in the possession of the institution linked to the research. RUI will not collect signed consent forms; however, if necessary, the journal may request to see a copy at any time, even after publication.

6.3.5. Images of Human Participants

If an article includes images of people in a section dedicated to this purpose, authors must affirm that they obtained consent to publish the images; the consent document must indicate that the details/images/videos will be freely available on the internet and may be viewed by the general public. Additionally, authors must take steps to protect the identity of the people in the images.

6.4. Research involving animals

6.4.1. Ethical Approval

When submitted articles include experiments conducted on animals, authors must declare in the "Article Presentation Letter and Partial Use License" that all procedures followed the relevant guidelines and regulations. Additionally, in a specific section, the article must include the name of the institutional and national research ethics committee that approved the research and the committee's reference number, if applicable since regulations regarding the need for ethical approval vary worldwide and depend on the type of study, it is important to ensure that local and national ethical requirements are met. In some countries, all studies require ethical approval; in others, it is unnecessary. RUI recommends adhering to the specific ethical regulations of the place where the research was conducted. Additionally, authors are requested to explain in a dedicated section why the study did not require the approval of an ethics committee.

6.4.2. Informed Consent

Articles presenting experimental studies involving animals (their data, biological material, etc.) owned by third parties must include a statement in a dedicated section affirming that informed consent was obtained from the owners of the animals.

6.4.3. ARRIVE 2.0

Authors are invited to report on live animal experiments using the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines; reviewers are invited to use these guidelines to ensure the inclusion of all relevant information that will be evaluated in the article. The ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines were published in the journal PLOS Biology in July 2020, consisting of a checklist detailing the necessary information in research publications involving animals; their implementation ensures that studies provide sufficient details to contribute to advancing knowledge. This transparency allows readers and reviewers to properly analyze the research, evaluate its methodological rigor, and reproduce the methods and results.

6.5. Research involving paleontological and geological material

Samples must be collected and handled responsibly, complying with local and national laws. All articles must provide transparent information about their provenance to ensure the transparency of the research. Information about permits obtained for new material must be included. Specific details may be excluded in case of risk to paleontological or geological sites, notifying this in the "Article Presentation Letter and Partial Use License." The deposit of three-dimensional scans of fossil specimens in an accessible repository is encouraged to facilitate their study by the scientific community.

7. Availability of Data, Codes, and Algorithms

Data, codes, and materials contributing to research transparency and reproducibility must be made available, with any limitations or restrictions clearly stated.

7.1. Data Availability

At RUI, we consider the availability of data in scientific research to be fundamental for several reasons, listed below:

Transparency and reproducibility: other researchers can examine and validate the published results when data are available. This promotes transparency in research and facilitates the reproduction of studies, strengthening confidence in scientific findings.
Efficiency and advancement of knowledge: by sharing data, duplication of efforts is avoided, and collaboration among researchers is promoted; this accelerates the pace of scientific discovery by allowing others to build upon existing work.
Maximum utilization of resources: data availability allows other researchers to use the data sets to address new research questions or conduct secondary analyses, maximizing the value of the resources invested in data collection.
Transparency and accountability: by making data available, researchers are subjected to greater scrutiny and can be held accountable for the quality of their data and analyses; this promotes sound and ethical scientific practices.

When submitting an article to the RUI, authors must make the data associated with the research available to the editorial team and reviewers. In the "Article Presentation Letter and Partial Use License," authors are required to provide information on access to primary data sets (generated during the study) and referenced data sets (analyzed in the study). Access codes or other unique identifiers must be provided if the data are publicly available.

Any restrictions regarding the availability of data or information must be communicated to RUI when submitting the article, clearly explaining the reasons for the limitation on access; RUI reserves the right to reject the article if it considers the restrictions excessively restrictive.

All published articles presenting original research must include, in a specific section, a statement of data availability with identification or access information to the repository where the data are hosted; any restrictions related to the data must be disclosed in the published article. This includes explaining the reasons behind the restriction or controlled access (such as privacy concerns or legal agreements), the conditions for accessing the data, the contact details for access requests, the expected response time for these requests, and the restrictions imposed on the use of data through data use agreements.

Whenever possible, data should be submitted to repositories specific to the publication discipline (repositories can be searched on FAIRsharing) or to general repositories recognized by the community (for example, a scientific data bank) that ensure the long-term preservation of the data sets in their published form.

7.2. Availability of code and algorithm

During the evaluation process, authors must make any custom computer code or algorithm used to generate the reported results available to the editorial team of RUI and to the reviewers upon request from the editorial team.

The editorial team will evaluate any reason preventing the sharing of the code or algorithm and reserves the right to reject the article if such code is unavailable; all published articles presenting research that uses custom code or algorithm considered central to the conclusions must include, in a specific section, a statement of code and algorithm availability. This statement must indicate whether the code or algorithm is available for access, how to access it (identification or access information to the repository where it is hosted), and detail any applicable access restrictions (reasons and conditions for accessing the code or algorithm).

7.3. Availability of materials

During the evaluation process, authors must make any material used to generate the reported results available to the editorial team of RUI and to the reviewers upon request from the editorial team. If materials are requested, the authors will bear the shipping costs.

The editorial team will evaluate any reason preventing the sharing of the material and reserves the right to reject the article if such material is unavailable; authors of published articles must make the unique materials used in their research available to others. Unless the published article indicates otherwise and details the reason and type of restriction (for example, legal precautions), authors are responsible for making such materials available to those who request them.

8. Instructions for Publishing Images

Minimal image editing is encouraged; any necessary image manipulation must be documented; in cases where it is essential to overlay images, the boundaries must be demarcated in the figure and described in the caption. Authors must indicate how they acquired an image and any subsequent processing or adjustment performed.

9. Artificial Intelligence

Given the novel nature of the topic, this section of RUI editorial policy is currently under construction; the journal does not accept Artificial Intelligence (AI) as an author or permit the publication of images created by generative AI unless the research explicitly involves such technology. AI use in the editorial process must be disclosed.

9.1. Artificial intelligence authorship

RUI does not accept AI as an author; however, AI can simulate human intelligence by developing systems capable of performing specific tasks like a human would. AI cannot assume responsibility for the content and integrity of a published article.

9.2. Use of artificial intelligence by the editorial team and reviewers

The editorial team and reviewers may use artificial intelligence, provided that the confidentiality of the received article is not compromised. Therefore, articles are requested not to be uploaded to generative AI tools (e.g., GPT); if any comment on the article's content is supported by artificial intelligence, the use of such AI must be reported to the editor through the review format.

The final decision on whether use of a generative AI tool is appropriate or permitted in the context of a submitted manuscript or published article rests with the editor.

9.3. Images Generated by Generative artificial intelligence

The RUI does not accept the publication of images created by generative AI, with the exception of articles that investigate the generation of images with this type of AI. If applicable, the article must include a clear description of the content generated by AI and specify the model. or tool used, mentioning the name, version number, extension and manufacturer. Authors must take responsibility for the integrity of the content created with these models and tools.

9.4. General use of AI

The use of AI should be properly acknowledged and documented in the Methods section of the manuscript. When using AI tools, authors are expected to act responsibly, complying with editorial policies on authorship and ethical principles of scientific publishing.

The author is fully responsible for the accuracy of any information generated by the AI tool and for correctly citing any work it refers to.

Tools used to improve spelling, grammar, and general editing are not included in the scope of these guidelines.

10. Selection of Peer Evaluators

Peer evaluators are selected based on their qualifications and recent publication history. The review process includes several stages to ensure compliance with the journal’s standards and ethical guidelines.

RUI Peer evaluators are selected based on their qualifications and recent publication history, who meet the following characteristics: hold a master's (M.Sc.) or doctorate (Ph.D.) degree in the area or topic of the article.

Have published at least one research article within the last two years in journals indexed in citation bibliographic indexes or bibliographic databases with a scientific committee. The review process includes several stages to ensure compliance with the journal’s standards and ethical guidelines.

10.1. Role of the reviewers

The role of the academic peers is to classify the assigned document into one of the typologies established by the journal (scientific and technological research article, review article, and case report) and determine whether it is publishable. The reviewers' opinions can be accepted, accepted with minor modifications, accepted with significant modifications, rejected for being incomplete, and rejected because their content is inappropriate for publication.

When there is no consensus among the opinions issued by the three evaluators, a fourth evaluator is consulted to issue a definitive opinion.

10.2. Review process

From its reception, every document goes through the following stages of arbitration:

Editorial team review: with the help of the editorial team, the editor examines compliance with the minimum requirements of form and quality of content. In this stage, Turnitin, a web tool that detects cases of similarity and plagiarism, is used.
Section editor review: a section editor is assigned who verifies, according to the nature of the submission, the appropriateness of its publication. The documents can address various topics, but the link to the areas of publication of RUI (engineering and applied sciences, especially materials science, decision sciences, and engineering in manufacturing) must be made explicit.
Evaluation by academic peers: a simple blind evaluation process is conducted by three researchers affiliated with a national or international academic or research institution. Academic peers are requested to send their reviews through our system using the link in the editor's email.
Proof correction: this is a cross-sectional process that takes place from the document's reception to the production of the document's final version. It involves reviewing the document at all stages of production to detect spelling and punctuation errors and verify that the author has made the modifications suggested by the reviewers, if applicable.
Layout: once the document's final version is obtained, the text is formatted, and the necessary files are generated for the digital publication of the article.

10.3. Selection of peer reviewers

The Revista UIS Ingenierías seeks academics with experience and reputation who meet the following characteristics:

Independence of the authors and their institutions
Ability to comprehensively and equitably evaluate the technical aspects of the article.
Be a master's degree (M. Sc.) or doctor (Ph. D.) in the area or topic of the article.
Have published at least one research article during the last 2 years in journals indexed in bibliographic citation indexes or bibliographic bases with a scientific committee.

10.4.Responsibility of the reviewers

Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the material from articles accepted for review; they cannot discuss unpublished manuscripts with colleagues or use the information in their work.
Inform the journal editor when there is a conflict of interest with the research or results presented in the article assigned to them.
Reviews must be conducted objectively.
Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Please send to the editor the evaluation format provided by the journal, duly filled out through our OJS system using the link provided in the editor's email.
Inform the journal editor when the article under review raises any suspicion of fraud.
Make suggestions, corrections, or requests to modify articles whenever they deem appropriate.
Issue an opinion on the article assigned to them.

10.5. Instructions for evaluators

Every article submitted to RUI must be framed within the areas related to engineering and applied sciences, especially materials science, decision sciences, and engineering in manufacturing. Additionally, it must correspond to one of the following typologies: original scientific and technological research article, review article, and case report, typologies that are described in the evaluation format; every article submitted must meet the following requirements:

Be written in Spanish or English, clearly and without spelling errors.
Be original and of immediate interest to people from its discipline and people from several disciplines.
Contribute novel knowledge in one or several of the areas of expertise in which the journal publishes.
The abstract must be clear.
Present a problem grounded in a reasonable review of the state of the art and a solid conceptual framework.
Have clear objectives and present one or more appropriate methods to achieve the proposed goals.
The data and information must be sufficiently detailed and transparent to reproduce the results.
Present results and conclusions consistent with the objectives and the method, or methods employed, contributing to the solution of the problem posed.
Make appropriate reference to previous literature.
Include at least 15 bibliographic references. For review articles, a minimum of 50 references must be included.

10.6. Evaluation time

The evaluation process is subject to the availability of the reviewers; once the section editor approves the article, the evaluation of the document is requested from the peers. A deadline of 10 days is set for the evaluators to respond to the request; in case there is no response during this period, the evaluation is requested from another peer. When a reviewer accepts to evaluate the document, they are sent the evaluation format, which must be completed and returned within a maximum period of 20 days. Reviewers are encouraged to respond within the agreed timeframe; if they anticipate a delay, they are asked to inform us to keep the authors informed and, if necessary, seek alternatives.

10.7. Editing the reviewers' opinions

All comments directed at the authors are shared, regardless of our opinion of their content. In rare cases, a reviewer's comment might be edited, for example, to remove offensive language or confidential information about third parties.

10.8. Acknowledgment to the reviewer

At RUI, the contribution of external reviewers of articles published in the journal is formally recognized. All peer-reviewed content is credited directly through a thank you email that can be registered as a review activity on the Web of Science researcher profile platform (formerly Publons).

11.Confidentiality

Confidentiality in editing scientific articles is crucial to safeguard intellectual property, maintain the integrity of the peer review process, and prevent conflicts of interest; for this reason, the editorial team, authors, and reviewers must commit to maintaining the confidentiality of all aspects of the editorial and review process, regardless of whether an article is published. Communication with the journal, the reviewers' reports, and any other confidential material must not be disclosed, divulged, or shared without the prior written consent of all parties involved in the article's editorial process. The articles submitted to RUI undergo single-blind review, meaning that the reviewers' identities are not revealed. We strive to maintain this confidentiality; however, we must mention that we cannot guarantee its permanence in the event of legal action that requires the journal to disclose such identities.

Reviewers are requested not to identify themselves to the authors while the manuscript is under consideration without the editor's knowledge.

12. Editorial Team and Its Responsibility

The editorial team of RUI consists of an editor, an editorial and scientific committee, and an editorial assistant. The editorial team has the duty and responsibility to:

Develop the editorial policies and publication standards and ensure compliance in each published issue.
Accept or reject the submitted articles according to the conditions stipulated by the journal.
Manage the editorial process of the submitted articles and maintain confidentiality during the simple blind peer review process, regardless of whether the article is rejected or accepted for publication.
Verify the relevance of the suggestions made by the evaluators and the corrections made by the authors when these have been requested.
Publish, when necessary, clarifications, errata, and rectifications in the digital version of the journal.
Support complaints, claims, and problems arising from the publication of scientific articles.

13. License to Publish and Self-Archiving

13.1. License to publish

Authors retain copyright but grant the journal the right of first publication under a specified Creative Commons license that allows third parties to use the published work as long as they mention the authorship of the work and its first publication in RUI. Authors may self-archive under conditions compatible with the journal's policies (e.g., include it in an institutional repository or publish it in a book) as long as they indicate that the work was first published in RUI.

Authors may make other separate and additional contractual arrangements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (e.g., including it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book) as long as they clearly indicate that the work was published for the first time at RUI.

13.2. Self-Archiving

13.2.1. Preprint self-archiving

If you plan to submit an article that has already been published as a preprint before submitting it to the journal, you must provide details about that preprint; this includes the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and the license terms that apply to that preprint when submitting the article to the journal. Authors who publish preprints of the articles submitted are asked to choose licenses that do not affect how the preprint can be shared and reused and are compatible with the license adopted by the RUI. Consulted preprints must be cited in the reference list of the articles submitted to RUI.

RUI reserves the right to reject the article if it considers that the publication of the preprint of a submitted article was not notified on time.

Once the article is published, the author must ensure that the preprint record is updated with a publication reference, including the DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the journal's website.

13.2.2. Self-archiving of published articles

Authors may self-archive the published article on their website or in repositories immediately after publication on RUI web, along with a link to the URL of the published article on the journal's website and details that it is the definitive version published in the journal.

14.Similarity, Plagiarism, and Simultaneous Submission

14.1. Similarity, plagiarism of received and published articles

Similarity in scientific research refers to the coincidence of ideas, words, structures, or content between two works; this can be a legitimate coincidence due to the nature of the topic or the state of knowledge in the field. On the other hand, plagiarism in scientific research occurs when the work, ideas, or words of others are used without proper acknowledgment or attribution; this may include directly copying and pasting text, paraphrasing without properly citing the source, or using ideas or results without mentioning their origins. Plagiarism is a serious ethical violation in scientific research and can have legal and professional consequences.

The journal uses tools like Turnitin to manage and identify similarity and plagiarism; articles with excessive similarity or those submitted simultaneously to other journals are subject to rejection.

14.2. Simultaneous submission of the article to several journals

When we are informed by another editor or reviewer or the editorial team of RUI identifies the potential simultaneous submission of an article, the review will be suspended while an investigation is conducted. If evidence is obtained that the article is being evaluated simultaneously by another journal, the article will be rejected.

When communication about possible similarity or plagiarism is received after the article's publication on the web, the editorial team of the journal will compare the documents and identify how much content overlaps in case there is evidence of systematic redundancy or overlap indicating dishonest or fraudulent practices, the article will be retracted or the original publication modified according to the degree of plagiarism, the context within the published article, and its impact on the overall integrity of the published study.

14.3.Other manifestations of misconduct

This section covers practices such as fabrication of data, manipulation of results, publication of defamatory content, infringement of third-party intellectual property rights, violation of the right to privacy, and other forms of fraud or unethical behavior in research. If a reader, editor, reviewer, or the editorial team of the RUI identifies or receives a report of possible misconduct, an individual evaluation will be carried out by the relevant interested parties, in accordance with the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Depending on the case, the possibility of notifying the authors' affiliation institutions and the funders of the article will be considered.

15. Corrections and Retractions

When any communication expressing concern about a published article is received, the editorial team of RUI will immediately initiate a review and, in severe cases, the respective investigation; below, we list the corrections and updates made after publishing a research article in RUI.

Author corrections: authors may request corrections if they identify errors that may compromise the scientific integrity of the article, the publication record, or the reputation of both the authors and the journal after its publication.
Editor correction: when the editorial team has made significant errors that may affect the scientific integrity of the published article, the publication record, or the reputation of both the authors and the journal after its publication.
Correction with amendments: errors or inaccuracies in an already published article may be corrected through amendments; these amendments may include rectifying factual, typographical, or formatting errors. The purpose of these corrections is to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the published work. Articles will have an amendment notice detailing the modifications.
Editorial statement of concern: when an editor has serious problems that affect the integrity of a published article, an editorial statement of concern is issued; this statement is made public online while an investigation is conducted. Depending on the situation, it may be provisional or definitive. It will be indexed alongside the article and assigned a DOI.
Retraction: an article may be retracted when significant errors in its realization, analysis, or reporting are discovered that undermine its integrity. Additionally, ethical violations in publication or research may lead to retraction. The original article will be identified as retracted and available to readers, with a retraction statement linked to the original article; these statements generally include the consent or disagreement of the authors.

16. How to Address Issues Arising After Publishing an Article?

Authors, reviewers, editorial team members, readers, and the general public can communicate their concerns, requests for clarification, or complaints to the email revistaingenierias@uis.edu.co.

We are committed to addressing issues during the review process and after publication and to making corrections promptly. The article may be rejected and returned to the author if it is still under review.

If the article is already published, a correction or amendment will be issued depending on the severity of the identified problems. An editorial statement of concern will be published if an investigation is opened. In extreme situations, the article might be retracted.

17. Editorial Management Times

An estimated six days is set from receiving the document on the OJS platform until the section editor's opinion is issued.

The evaluation process depends directly on the availability of the evaluators; when the section editor endorses the article, the evaluation of the document is requested from the peers. The time limit between the request and the response from an evaluator is ten days. If, during this period, there is no response, a request for evaluation is sent to another peer.

Once the evaluator approves the document, they are sent the evaluation format; this maximum deadline is 20 days to perform and send their review.

After receiving the evaluation, if there are suggestions for changes, the authors are notified and have a maximum of 15 days to make formal changes and 30 days to make substantive changes.

After obtaining the corrected version of the document, a final review with change control is conducted and sent to the layout. The time for correction varies according to the number and complexity of the corrections, as well as the response speed of the authors.

Once the document is laid out, the author can review the last version before publication; after approval, the document is published in print and digital versions. The time elapsed until the printing of the paper version depends entirely on the management of the publications department of the UIS.

The times for sending evaluations are variable, as they are subject to the availability of the evaluators, who perform an ad-honorem review; if time is needed, a notification is sent to the author or authors via email.

If, after three months, the article has yet to be subjected to peer review, the authors are notified so that they can decide whether to continue with the editorial process.

18. Financing

La RUI is financed exclusively by the Programa de Apoyo a Revistas UIS of the Universidad Industrial de Santander, Colombia. Not any type of sponsorship or external financing, or from third parties.