Open Access Policy

Acknowledgement

Individuals who have contributed to the article—such as through general supervision, funding acquisition, study design, data collection or analysis, technical assistance, formatting or writing support, or scholarly discussions that significantly informed the development of the article—but who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed by name and affiliation in the Acknowledgments section. It is the responsibility of the authors to inform these individuals and obtain their permission prior to inclusion. This process should involve sharing the manuscript to allow individuals to verify the context in which their contributions are acknowledged.

Groups of individuals who have made material contributions that do not justify authorship may be listed under collective headings such as “clinical investigators” or “participating investigators,” with a description of their role—for example, “served as scientific advisors,” “critically reviewed the study proposal,” “collected data,” or “provided and cared for study patients.” Since readers may infer endorsement of the data and conclusions, written permission from these individuals is required for acknowledgment.

Any use of AI tools for content generation (e.g., large language models) or similar technologies must be explicitly acknowledged in the manuscript. Authors are responsible for ensuring the validity, originality, and integrity of the content produced, and must use such tools responsibly and in accordance with the journal’s editorial policies regarding authorship and publication ethics.

Advertisements

This journal does not accept advertising from external or third-party sources.

Affiliations

Authors must disclose all relevant institutional affiliations to accurately reflect where the research was approved, supported, and/or conducted. For non-research articles, authors should indicate their current institutional affiliation.

If an author has changed institutions prior to publication, they must list the affiliation associated with the work conducted and include their current affiliation and contact information in the Acknowledgments section.

A change in affiliation alone does not constitute a valid reason for the removal of an author from the publication, provided the individual continues to meet the established authorship criteria.

Appeals and Complaints

The editorial board of the journal is responsible for handling appeals and complaints in accordance with the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors who wish to file an appeal or complaint should contact the editorial office directly to express their concerns. Each case will be reviewed by the editorial board, and a decision will be made in line with COPE principles.

The editor-in-chief holds the final authority in all decisions regarding appeals and complaints. In certain cases, an ombudsperson may be appointed to address issues that cannot be resolved internally.

The journal is committed to a fair and transparent process in managing appeals and complaints, with the primary objective of upholding the integrity of the scientific record.

Authorship

Authorship of a scientific article signifies a substantial contribution to the work and shared responsibility and accountability for its content. To qualify for authorship, individuals must meet all of the following criteria:

· Made a significant contribution to one or more of the following aspects: conception or design of the study, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation.

· Participated in drafting, writing, or critically revising the manuscript.

· Approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission to the journal.

· Accepted responsibility and accountability for the integrity and accuracy of the article.

Contributions that do not meet these criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section.

Authors should not only take responsibility for their own contributions but also be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific aspects of the work. This ensures transparency and proper attribution of contributions. Authors are encouraged to use the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) system to describe individual contributions during submission. The contribution statement, agreed upon by all authors and communicated by the corresponding author, will be published with the article and must accurately reflect each author’s role.

Authors should also have confidence in the integrity and ethical conduct of their co-authors. This includes trust in the accuracy and reliability of the data and findings presented in the manuscript.

Individuals who do not fulfill all four criteria should not be listed as authors. However, their contributions may be acknowledged on the title page or in the Acknowledgments section to maintain transparency.

If the editorial board suspects ghost, honorary, or gift authorship, the submission process will be suspended. The journal will follow the relevant COPE flowcharts and policies on authorship and contributorship in addressing such cases..

Change of Authorship

Requests to change authorship—including the addition or removal of authors or a change in author order—must be submitted to the editorial office with a written explanation signed by all listed authors, including those being added or removed.

The journal’s editorial board will address such requests in accordance with COPE guidelines, applying a consistent and transparent approach to ensure the integrity of the scholarly record and protect the reputations of all contributors.

Citations

Both research and non-research articles must include citations to relevant, timely, and verifiable literature—preferably peer-reviewed—to substantiate any claims made within the manuscript.

Authors should avoid excessive or inappropriate self-citation and must not engage in prearranged citation practices with other author groups. Such actions may constitute citation manipulation, a form of publication misconduct. Authors are encouraged to consult the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on citation manipulation for further clarification.

For non-research articles, such as reviews or opinion pieces, references must be carefully selected to provide a fair, balanced, and comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on the topic. Citations should not disproportionately favor any specific research group, institution, or journal.

If there is any uncertainty regarding the appropriateness of a citation, authors are advised to consult the journal’s editorial office for guidance..

Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts are considered confidential material. *The Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences* will not disclose the content of any submission to individuals other than those directly involved in the editorial and publication process, including editorial staff, corresponding authors, potential and invited reviewers, and editors.

In cases where misconduct is suspected, the journal reserves the right to share the manuscript with members of relevant ethics committees or with institutions and organizations as necessary to facilitate the investigation and resolution of the alleged misconduct.

Copyright Policy

A Copyright Agreement, which includes an Acknowledgment of Authorship, must be submitted alongside all manuscript submissions. By signing this agreement, authors consent that, if accepted for publication by the Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences, their work will be published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). This license permits third parties to share and adapt the content for non-commercial purposes, provided appropriate credit is given to the original work.

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission from copyright holders to reproduce any previously published material—such as figures, tables, or other content—regardless of whether it appears in print or electronic formats. Authors bear full legal, financial, and ethical responsibility for any copyright infringements.

The copyright of articles published in the Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences remains with the authors. However, by submitting to the journal, authors transfer the commercial usage rights exclusively to the journal. All articles are published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.

Authors are permitted to use copies of their published articles for academic and research purposes, including posting on personal, institutional, or funder websites, provided full citation to the version published in the Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences is included. Authors may also share, transmit, or print the submitted version of their manuscripts with colleagues, in professional settings, or for career development, again with appropriate citation of the journal publication..

Declaration of Interests

Authors are required to disclose any relationships, affiliations, or financial interests that could potentially influence or bias the content of their work. This disclosure must be completed during the manuscript submission process via the journal’s online submission system.

The Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences also expects and encourages all individuals involved in the peer review process—including editors and reviewers—to declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may affect their objectivity.

Any cases involving potential conflicts of interest among authors, reviewers, or editorial staff will be managed by the Editorial Board in accordance with the relevant COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) flowcharts and best practice guidelines.

Desk Rejection Policy

1. The topic / scope of the study is not relevant to the field of the Journal.

2. There are publication ethics problems, non-adherence to international standard guidelines, and plagiarism (set at a similarity index of higher than 20 percent).

3. The topic does not have a sufficient impact, nor does it sufficiently contribute new knowledge to the field.

4. There are flaws in the study design.

5. The objective of the study is not clearly stated.

6. The study of the organization is problematic and/or certain components are missing.

7. There are problems in writing or series infelicities of in the style of grammar.

8. The manuscript does not follow the submission guideline of the Journal.

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in the manuscripts published in this journal are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors, editorial board, or publisher. The editors, editorial board, and publisher accept no responsibility for the content of the manuscripts and do not endorse the views expressed therein.

It is the sole responsibility of the authors to ensure the accuracy, validity, and integrity of their work. The journal provides a platform for authors to disseminate their research to the scientific community; however, responsibility for the content remains with the authors.

Duplicate Submission/Publication

Authors must confirm at the time of submission that the manuscript has not been submitted to or is not under consideration by another journal. The identification of duplicate submission or publication is typically regarded as a deliberate breach of ethical standards. This includes manuscripts previously published in another language.

In accordance with the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), certain secondary publications (e.g., a translated version of an article) may be considered acceptable. In such cases, authors must obtain permission from the original publisher and copyright holder and inform the Editor of the receiving journal about the full publication history of the original work.

Furthermore, the translated article must clearly indicate that it is a version of a previously published work, and a full citation to the original article must be included to ensure transparency for readers..

Financial Disclosure

The Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences requires authors to disclose all sources of financial support received in the course of conducting their research. This information must be included in a funding statement submitted with the manuscript.

The funding statement should clearly identify the names of all funding agencies, associated grant numbers, and specify the role of each funder in the design, execution, analysis, or reporting of the research. If a funder had no involvement in any aspect of the study, this should be explicitly stated.

Providing this information is essential to ensure transparency and to help readers assess any potential biases or conflicts of interest related to the research.

Funding

Authors are required to disclose all sources of funding, including any financial support received for the research. The role of the sponsor(s), if applicable, must be clearly described—whether in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. If the sponsor(s) had no involvement in any of these stages, this should also be explicitly stated.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the funding information is complete, accurate, and compliant with the requirements of the funding agency.

Open Access Policy

The Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences is an open access journal, meaning that all content is freely accessible to users and their institutions without any subscription or payment. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, and link to the full texts of articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without requiring prior permission from the publisher or the author.

All content is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). This license allows use, sharing, and adaptation of the material for non-commercial purposes, provided appropriate credit is given to the original source.

All published articles are available free of charge at: https://sigma.yildiz.edu.tr.

Peer Review Policy

Submissions that comply with the journal’s guidelines are first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief, who assesses their suitability in terms of scope, quality, and originality. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable may be rejected without external review at this initial stage.

For submissions considered appropriate, the Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to an Associate Editor, who oversees the peer review process. Associate Editors are responsible for selecting qualified peer reviewers and may, at their discretion, reject the manuscript, initiate peer review, or request initial revisions prior to external evaluation.

Based on reviewers' reports, the Associate Editor makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief. Revised manuscripts are re-evaluated—preferably by the original reviewers—and a new recommendation is submitted. The Editor-in-Chief holds the final decision-making authority for all manuscripts.

In cases of editorial delays, authors will be notified of the cause and given the option to withdraw their manuscript. Following completion of the review process, authors receive the editorial decision along with anonymous reviewer reports. These reports are confidential and will not be made publicly available.

All submitted materials are treated as confidential and must not be used or disclosed prior to publication. In suspected cases of reviewer misconduct, such as misappropriation of ideas or data, the Editorial Board will take appropriate action in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

Authors may recommend potential peer reviewers during submission; however, the final decision on whether to invite them rests solely with the handling editor.

Peer reviewers are expected to adhere to COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, ensuring a fair, objective, and confidential review process. The Editorial Board also follows COPE flowcharts to detect and manage peer review manipulation. If manipulation is suspected after publication, the journal will follow the corresponding COPE protocol.

Potential reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest before accepting an invitation. Disclosure enables editors to make informed decisions and supports the integrity of the peer review process.

All communications between editors and reviewers are confidential and must not be shared with third parties.

To ensure impartiality, submissions from members of the journal’s Editorial Board are handled by external editors, selected based on academic credentials and peer review expertise. The identities of external editors and reviewers are kept confidential to maintain objectivity. They are also required to declare any potential conflicts of interest.

Plagiarism and Ethical Misconduct

All submissions are subject to multiple rounds of similarity checks throughout the peer-review and production processes, using plagiarism detection software (Crossref Similarity Check powered by iThenticate).

When referencing prior work—whether by other authors or the submitting authors themselves—it is imperative to provide accurate and consistent citation in all instances.

Authors are strictly expected to avoid all forms of plagiarism and ethical misconduct. The following practices are considered serious violations of publication ethics:

· Citation Manipulation: Intentionally inflating citation counts through excessive self-citation, citation of articles from the same journal, or inclusion of irrelevant or honorary citations.

· Self-Plagiarism (Text Recycling): Reusing portions of one's previously published work without appropriate citation. Even if the reused text is the author's own, failing to acknowledge its prior publication constitutes plagiarism.

· Salami Slicing: Fragmenting a single substantial research study into multiple smaller publications, potentially misleading readers regarding the novelty and impact of the work.

· Data Fabrication: Creating fictitious data or results that were never actually observed or collected. This is a serious breach of research integrity.

· Data Falsification or Manipulation: Deliberately modifying or omitting research data to misrepresent the outcomes. This includes altering figures, manipulating images, and excluding unfavorable results.

In cases of alleged or suspected ethical misconduct—including but not limited to plagiarism, citation manipulation, or data falsification—the Editorial Board will handle the matter in accordance with the relevant COPE flowcharts, ensuring that all investigations are conducted fairly, transparently, and consistently.

Post-Publication Corrections and Ethical Misconduct Handling

All requests for post-publication corrections are subject to editorial evaluation. The Editorial Board will assess whether a correction is warranted based on the nature of the error, its potential impact on the integrity of the article, and the availability of supporting documentation. The board may consult with the authors, reviewers, or external experts before making a final decision. If approved, the correction will be made in the journal’s online archive, and the updated version will be clearly marked.

The journal follows its internal editorial policies and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines in handling such matters.

In cases where ethical concerns are raised—either by readers, reviewers, or whistleblowers—the Editorial Board will respond according to the relevant COPE flowcharts, including those that address allegations made via social media or public platforms. If concerns cannot be resolved internally, an ombudsperson may be appointed to mediate the case.

To ensure a thorough and efficient investigation, the Editorial Board may share information with editors-in-chief of other journals or stakeholders involved. When doing so, all communications will adhere to COPE’s recommendations regarding editor-to-editor cooperation.

In serious cases of suspected ethical misconduct, the journal may contact the authors’ affiliated institutions, providing documented evidence to support the allegations, again following COPE guidelines.

If an investigation confirms the presence of misconduct, the Editorial Board may issue a retraction notice. This notice will be published in the journal and the article’s online version will be updated to clearly indicate its retracted status. While retracted articles will remain accessible in the journal's archive for the scholarly record, they will be distinctly labeled as retracted. The retraction will also be reflected in all relevant indexing databases.

Preprint Policy

The Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences* does not consider the posting of manuscripts on non-commercial preprint servers as prior publication. Authors are permitted to share and discuss their findings via such platforms prior to formal submission to the journal.

However, authors must disclose the existence of the preprint during the initial submission process, including the name of the preprint server and the corresponding DOI or persistent link.

If the manuscript is accepted and published by the journal, it is the authors’ responsibility to update the preprint record by linking it to the final, published version of the article. This practice ensures transparency and allows readers to access the most reliable and up-to-date version of the work.

Publication Ethics

The Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences is firmly committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics, as outlined by leading international organizations, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, a joint statement issued by COPE, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

These guidelines provide a comprehensive framework to ensure transparency, integrity, and accountability in all aspects of scholarly publishing.

COPE offers detailed guidance on key ethical concerns such as authorship disputes, plagiarism, and conflicts of interest. By adhering to COPE’s best practices, the journal ensures that all submitted and published research meets ethical standards, thereby maintaining the trust of the academic community and the public.

The Principles of Transparency and Best Practice emphasize essential components of journal operations, including editorial oversight, peer review processes, and research data handling. These principles advocate for clarity and openness in journal policies and workflows, fostering an environment of fairness and scholarly rigor.

By fully aligning with these standards, the Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences ensures that its publications are ethically sound, scientifically robust, and contribute reliably to the advancement of knowledge. This commitment enhances the journal’s credibility and supports reproducibility and integrity in scientific communication.

Responsibilities of Editors

Our editorial board carefully evaluates submitted articles based on their quality and merit, considering reviewer feedback and ensuring compliance with legal standards to avoid libel, copyright violations, and plagiarism, without bias towards the authors' background, nationality, political views, race, or religion. Editors maintain strict confidentiality, sharing manuscript details only with relevant parties, and unpublished content cannot be used without the author's permission. Transparency is ensured by disclosing funding sources and potential influences on the research. We strive for unbiased, fair, and efficient peer review, with special policies for submissions from editorial board members, and provide clear authorship guidelines. Reviewers are encouraged to flag ethical concerns, and their comments are shared with authors unless offensive. We appreciate our reviewers' contributions and discontinue collaboration with those providing poor, disrespectful, or delayed feedback. Editors uphold journal standards by verifying ethical approvals and addressing intellectual property issues, making prompt corrections when necessary. Reviewers assist in shaping the publication with objective, constructive critiques supported by evidence, avoiding personal attacks. They should decline reviews if lacking expertise or facing conflicts of interest, maintain confidentiality, and not use unpublished ideas or data for personal benefit, while ensuring proper attribution and identifying significant overlaps with other works.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Our editorial board carefully evaluates submitted articles based on their quality and merit, considering reviewer feedback and ensuring compliance with legal standards to prevent libel, copyright violations, and plagiarism, without bias regarding authors’ background, nationality, political views, race, or religion. Editors maintain strict confidentiality, sharing manuscript details only with relevant parties, and unpublished content must not be used without the author’s permission. Transparency is ensured by disclosing funding sources and any potential influences on the research. We strive for an unbiased, fair, and efficient peer review process, applying special policies for submissions from editorial board members, and providing clear authorship guidelines. Reviewers are encouraged to report any ethical concerns; their comments are shared with authors unless deemed offensive. We appreciate our reviewers’ contributions and discontinue collaboration with those who provide poor-quality, disrespectful, or delayed feedback. Editors uphold journal standards by verifying ethical approvals and addressing intellectual property issues, making prompt corrections when necessary. Reviewers assist in shaping the publication through objective, constructive critiques supported by evidence, avoiding personal attacks. They should decline review invitations if lacking expertise or facing conflicts of interest, maintain confidentiality, and refrain from using unpublished ideas or data for personal benefit. Proper attribution must be ensured, and significant overlaps with other works should be identified.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors must present their research truthfully, providing accurate data and a balanced discussion of its significance. Raw data should be available upon request and retained for at least two years after publication, as deliberately falsifying data or claims is unethical and unacceptable. Submissions must be original; proper credit must be given to others’ work, and plagiarism in any form, as well as submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously, is strictly prohibited. Authors are required to disclose any financial or personal conflicts of interest that could influence their work, and all funding sources must be acknowledged.

Authorship and Corrections

All listed co-authors must have made significant contributions to the work and approved the final manuscript. If major errors are discovered after publication, authors must promptly notify the journal to facilitate corrections or retractions.

Peer Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to the Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences undergo a double-anonymized peer review process, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. Each submission is reviewed by at least two external, independent experts to ensure an unbiased evaluation.

Initially, submissions undergo a technical evaluation by the editorial office to verify compliance with the journal’s guidelines. Manuscripts that do not conform will be returned to the authors for technical corrections.

Submissions meeting the guidelines are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief, who assesses their suitability based on scope and quality. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable may be rejected at this stage.

For manuscripts suitable for the journal, the Editor-in-Chief collaborates with Associate Editors, who recruit reviewers. Associate Editors may decide to reject a manuscript, proceed with peer review, or request revisions before further evaluation.

Based on reviewers’ reports, Associate Editors submit recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief. Revised manuscripts are reassessed by Associate Editors, who typically consult the original reviewers for further input.

The Editor-in-Chief holds the final decision-making authority for all submissions.

If delays occur during the review process, authors will be informed of the reasons and given the option to withdraw their manuscripts.

Upon completion of peer review, authors receive anonymized reviewer reports alongside the editorial decision. Peer review reports remain confidential and are not publicly disclosed. Submitted material is considered confidential and must not be used prior to publication. Suspected appropriation of authors’ ideas or data by reviewers will be addressed by the Editorial Board according to COPE guidelines.

Authors may recommend potential peer reviewers during submission; however, the handling editor retains sole discretion over inviting these reviewers.

Reviewers must adhere to COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, which provide a framework to ensure integrity and fairness. The Editorial Board follows COPE flowcharts to minimize and address peer review manipulation both pre- and post-publication.

Potential reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest to the editor before accepting an invitation, enabling informed decisions that preserve review integrity and transparency.

Communications between editors and reviewers contain confidential information and must not be shared with third parties.

To ensure fairness, manuscripts submitted by editorial board members are handled by external editors selected based on academic qualifications and peer review experience. The confidentiality of external editors and reviewers is strictly maintained to preserve impartiality. Both are required to disclose any conflicts of interest to promote transparency and reliability in the evaluation process..

Plagiarism Policy

The journal maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward plagiarism. Submissions that present another person’s ideas, words, or work without proper credit are not accepted. This includes:

· Full or partial plagiarism: Copying content from other sources without appropriate attribution.

· Duplicate or redundant publication: Submitting the same work to multiple journals simultaneously.

· Self-plagiarism: Reusing one’s own previously published work (including in a different language) without proper acknowledgment.

Exceptions: Preprints shared in public archives prior to submission are not considered duplicate publications..

Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author is responsible for the manuscript throughout the review and publication process and has the authority to act on behalf of all co-authors.
All submitted manuscripts are screened using professional plagiarism-detection software.
Manuscripts with an unacceptable similarity index due to plagiarism will be rejected immediately.
Publication Fee Policy

The Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences is funded by Yıldız Technical University. Authors are not required to pay any fees during the evaluation or publication process.

Publication Timing & Review Process

Submissions to the Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences are accepted on a rolling basis. Manuscripts should conform to the requested submission types and fully adhere to the author guidelines provided. The journal publishes six issues annually—in February, April, June, August, October, and December.

Submissions are considered for publication in the issue following their acceptance and readiness for publication, rather than based on the submission date. All issues follow the same editorial and peer review processes as outlined in these guidelines.

We encourage and welcome your submissions.

Research Data Policy and Data Availability Guidelines for Authors

The Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences encourages authors to share their research data to promote transparency, reproducibility, and the advancement of knowledge within the academic community. We acknowledge the importance of making data accessible to other researchers, while respecting ethical and legal constraints.

Authors are encouraged to make their data publicly available whenever possible, except in cases where privacy, confidentiality, or legal restrictions apply. Data should be shared in a way that allows verification of results and facilitates reuse for further research.

Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Manuscript Preparation

The Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences follows the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation. Authorship entails responsibilities and tasks that can only be fulfilled by humans. Authors are accountable for ensuring the originality of their work and for meeting the qualifications for authorship.

While AI tools may be employed for language correction and improvement during the writing process, such usage must be explicitly disclosed in the manuscript. AI cannot be credited as an author, as maintaining the originality and quality of the article is essential.

Self-Archiving Policy

Authors retain the right to self-archive their work on institutional or personal websites, as well as in open access repositories, following publication. Authors are expected to appropriately acknowledge the original publication and include the DOI when sharing their articles. Additionally, authors should provide a link from the deposited version to the publisher’s website URL. This practice ensures that the online version published by the publisher is recognized as the definitive version of record, thereby maintaining the integrity and authenticity of the scientific record.

Withdrawal Requests

Withdrawal requests for an article are reviewed by the journal’s editorial board. To initiate a withdrawal, authors must submit a letter signed by all co-authors detailing the request and the reasons for withdrawal to the journal editor. The editorial board will evaluate the request and make a decision based on the authors’ justification.

If approved, the article will be withdrawn from the journal, and the authors will be notified accordingly. Authors are advised not to submit their work to another journal until the withdrawal request has been officially approved, in order to avoid potential conflicts of interest or duplicate publication.

© Copyright 2025 Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences. All rights reserved for the website content. Articles published in this journal are licensed under a CC BY-NC license.