The scientific and editorial committees of CMU Annals aim at achieving and maintaining a high scientific level of the published articles, in order to place the review into the select world of international excellence in the domains of the review’s four series which will be published beginning with this academic year.
The peer-review process of the articles proposed for publication in the Annals of CMU is carried out in conformity with the common international procedures.
Therefore, an article proposed for publication and delivered to the editorial office will be selected and submitted simultaneously by the editorial committee to two of the members of the review committee who are conversant with the research field the paper deals with.
The peer-reviews are sent to the editorial office within a week, and the editorial committee is in charge of communicating the author(s) the result of each peer review.
The review committee members assess the paper according to the pattern below which consists of three essential chapters in attaining the paper’s high scientific standards:

  1. The scientific level of the paper
  2. Original contributions and outcomes
  3. Recommendations for the author(s)

Each of these chapters is rated from 5 to 1, depending on the quality standard of the paper.
Each peer-review is completed by drawing some conclusions which outline three possibilities of appraisal:

  1. The reviewer accepts the paper in its initial form;
  2. The paper is accepted after the authors rewrite it following the reviewer’s recommendations;
  3. The members of the review committee reject the paper.

Should both reviewers propose one of the alternatives a) or b), the paper is accepted for publication either in its initial form- if both reviewers suggest alternative a) –or after being rewritten, within a month starting with the date the author receives the paper’s appraisal from the two reviewers.

The paper is rejected in case alternative (3) is proposed.