Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

Life in Silico Publication Ethics Policy
We expect all authors to read and understand our ethics policy before submitting to our journal. This is in accordance with our commitment to the prevention of ethical misconduct, which we recognize to be a growing problem in academic and professional publications. It is important to note that most incidents of plagiarism, redundant publication, copyright infringement or similar occur because of a lack of understanding, and not through fraudulent intent. Our policy is one of prevention and not persecution. If you have any questions, please contact the editorial office.

Plagiarism Policy of Life in Silico
All papers submitted to International Life in Silico should fulfill the expectations regarding the authenticity of the paper. At the beginning of the submission, authors will be asked to submit a similarity report in PDF format by using a plagiarism software which determines the similarity rates such as iThenticate/Academic Paradigms, LLC-Check For Plagiarism/Grammarly-Plagiarism Checker. The Plagiarism-Similarity report must be in a PDF format for the entire text including tables and figures (excluding references). The total similarity rate of the articles sent to Life in Silico should not exceed 25% and the similarity rate to each individual source should not exceed 5%.

Editors' responsibilities
Publication decisions

Each member of the editorial board is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. The editor will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the journal's scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.

Reviewers' responsibilities
Contribution to editorial decisions

The peer-review process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer-review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

Authors' responsibilities
Reporting standards

Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data access and retention
Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources
Authors will submit only entirely original works, and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited. The similarity report should be uploaded in PDF format by using a plagiarism software which determines the similarity rates such as iThenticate/Academic Paradigms, LLC-Check For Plagiarism/Grammarly-Plagiarism Checker. The report should not exceeded 25%.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
In general, papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted to Life in Silico. In addition, manuscripts under review by the journal should not be resubmitted to other journals. By submitting an article, the author(s) transfer the rights of the published material to Life in Silico.

Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors and no uninvolved persons are included in the author list. The corresponding author will also verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Author contributions
For transparency, we encourage authors to submit an author statement in the manuscript outlining their individual contributions to the work using the relevant CRediT roles:

- Conceptualization
- Data curation
- Formal analysis
- Funding acquisition
- Investigation
- Methodology
- Project administration
- Resources
- Software
- Supervision
- Validation
- Visualization
- Writing
- Review & editing​
- Writing original draft
- Writing-reviewing & editing

Author contribution statements should be formatted with the initials of the names of authors (e.g. T.H. for Thomas Hunt) and Credit role(s).

Changes to authorship​
All authors should have made substantial contributions to all of the following:

- The conception and design of the study or acquisition of data or analysis and interpretation of data.
- Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
- Final approval of the version to be submitted.

If all 3 of these conditions are not met, a person does not qualify as an author and any contribution made by them should be mentioned in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript.

Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made only before the manuscript has been accepted and only if approved by the journal editor. To request such a change, the editor must receive the following from the corresponding author:

- the reason for the change in author list
- written confirmation (e-mail, letter) from all authors that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement in author name order

Only in exceptional circumstances will the editor consider the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been accepted. While the editor considers the request, publication of the manuscript will be suspended. If the manuscript has already been published in an online issue, any requests approved by the editor will result in a corrigendum.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should include a statement disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper in form of an erratum.

Our publication ethics and publication malpractice statement is mainly based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011).

Authors transfer all copyrights of their articles to Life in Silico.

Archiving Policy
The publisher uses LOCKSS for the archiving and preservation of its online content. Life in Silico is accessed via Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform which utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. Click here to view the LOCKSS Publisher Manifest page of Life in Silico.

Publication Language
Life in Silico publishes articles written only in English.

Publication Frequency
Life in Silico is published "online" once a year (annually) in December. If the Editorial Board finds it appropriate, a Special Issue can also be published.

Privacy Policy
Personal information entered into the Life in Silico site is used only for the specified purposes of this journal, cannot be used or shared for other purposes. This journal is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record and the journal will follow the COPE guidelines on how to deal with potential acts of misconduct.

Appeals and Complaints

Policy and Process

The below procedure applies to appeals to editorial decisions, complaints about failure of processes such as long delays in handling papers and complaints about publication ethics. The complaint will in first instance be handled by the Editor-in-Chief(s) responsible for Life in Silico (

Complaint about scientific content, e.g. an appeal against rejection

The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor considers the authors’ argument, the reviewer reports and decides whether

- The decision to reject should stand
- Another independent opinion is required
- The appeal should be considered.

The complainant is informed of the decision with an explanation if appropriate. Decisions on appeals are final and new submissions take priority over appeals.

Complaint about processes, e.g. time taken to review

The Editor-in-Chief together with the Handling Editor (where appropriate) and/or in-house contact (where appropriate) will investigate the matter. The complainant will be given appropriate feedback. Feedback is provided to relevant stakeholders to improve processes and procedures.

Complaint about publication ethics, e.g., researcher's, author's, or reviewer's conduct

The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor follows guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics. The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor may ask the publisher via their in-house contact for advice on difficult or complicated cases. The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor decides on a course of action and provides feedback to the complainant. If the complainant remains dissatisfied with the handling of their complaint, he or she can submit the complaint to the Committee on Publication Ethics. More information can be found here.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility Policy

Research data refers to units of information collected, observed, generated, or created to validate original research findings. Data may be numerical, descriptive, aural, or visual. Research data varies widely in format across disciplines, and can be anything from spreadsheets of quantifiable information, to qualitative information like interview data or field notes.

Life in Silico follow a minimum standard which encourages authors, where relevant, and subject to ethical and legal considerations, to openly share, cite, and link to their research data. Life in Silico will follow one of the guidelines from the framework below:

Option 1: Encouragement (share, cite, and linking encouraged)

Authors are encouraged to:

- Share your research data in a relevant public data repository (for example; PDBbind, bioRxiv, Research Square, etc.)
- Include a data availability statement linking to your data. If it is not possible to share your data, use the statement to confirm why it cannot be shared.
- Cite this data in your research

Option 2: Requirement (share, cite, and linking mandatory)

As a condition of publication authors are required to:

- Share your research data in a relevant public data repository (for example; PDBbind, bioRxiv, Research Square, etc.)
- Include a data availability statement. This should:

  • Indicate if data is available and shared
  • In certain cases, indicate if research data is available but not shared, and why. If you cannot share your data and this is a requirement of publication, consult the journal editorial office.
  • Indicate if there is an absence of data

- Cite data in your research

Option 3: Verification (share, cite, and linking mandatory, with peer review)

As a condition of publication, authors are required to:

- Share your research data in a relevant public data repository (for example; PDBbind, bioRxiv, Research Square, etc.)
- Include a data availability statement. This should:

  • Indicate if data is available and shared
  • In certain cases, indicate if research data is available but not shared, and why. If you cannot share your data and this is a requirement of publication, consult the journal editorial office.
  • Indicate if there is an absence of data

- Cite data in your research

Peer reviewers may be asked to peer review the research data prior to publication.

Life in Silico’s policy on ethical oversight

Life in Silico focus on the СОРE definition, of Ethical oversight, namely “Ethical oversight should include, but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and of business/marketing practices”. Based on this definition, the editorial staff of Life in Silico works under the issue of observing the ethical principles. Life in Silico will be bound to consider the appeals from the Ethics and Oversight Committee for professional and scientific activity concerning the non-observance of the ethical principles by our authors. We are also ready to consider other appeals in case they are not anonymous and substantiated.

Life in Silico’s policy on intellectual property

Life in Silico requires authors to make their articles open access under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY) to fulfill the open access publication conditions and ensure the widest possible dissemination.

Life in Silico’s options for post-publication discussions and corrections

Recognizing a published article as a finalized paper establishes the expectation that it can be relied upon as accurate, complete, and citable. Wherever possible it is our policy to maintain the integrity of the finalized paper.

Sometimes after an article has been published it may be necessary to make a change to the Version of Record. This will be done after careful consideration by Life in Silico Editor to ensure any necessary changes are made in accordance with guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Any necessary changes will be accompanied with a post-publication notice which will be permanently linked to the original article so that readers will be fully informed of any necessary changes. This can be in the form of a Correction notice, an Expression of Concern, a Retraction and in rare circumstances a Removal. The purpose of this mechanism of making changes which are permanent and transparent is to ensure the integrity of the scholarly record.

All correction, expressions of concern and retraction notices are free to access at the point of publication.

What should I do if my article contains an error?

Authors should notify us as soon as possible if they find errors in their published article, especially errors that could affect the interpretation of data or reliability of information presented. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure consensus has been reached between all listed co-authors prior to putting forward any requests for corrections or retractions to an article.

If, after reading the guidance, you believe a correction or retraction is necessary for your article, contact the journal’s Editor.

Post-publication notices to ensure the integrity of the scholarly record

Correction notice

A Correction notice will be issued when it is necessary to correct an error or omission which can impact the interpretation of the article, but where the scholarly integrity of the article remains intact. Examples include mislabeling of a figure, missing key information on funding or competing interests of the authors.

Life in Silico distinguishes between major and minor errors. For correction notices, major errors or omissions are considered to be any changes which impacts the interpretation of the article, but where the scholarly integrity of the article remains intact.

All major errors are accompanied by a separate correction notice. The correction notice should provide clear details of the error and the changes that have been made to the finalized paper. Under these circumstances Life in Silico will:

- Correct the online article.
- Issue a separate correction notice electronically linked back to the corrected version.
- Add a footnote to the article displaying the electronic link to the correction notice.
- Paginate and make available the correction notice in the online issue of the journal.
- Make the correction notice free to view.

Any minor errors will not be accompanied by a separate correction notice. Instead a footnote will be added to the article detailing to the reader that the article has been corrected. Minor errors do not impact the reliability of, or the reader’s understanding of, the scholarly content.


A Retraction notice will be issued where a major error (e.g. in the analysis or methods) invalidates the conclusions in the article, or where research misconduct or publication misconduct has taken place (e.g. research without required ethical approvals, fabricated data, manipulated images, plagiarism, duplicate publication etc). The decision to issue a retraction for an article will be made in accordance with COPE guidelines, and will involve an investigation by Life in Silico editorial staff in collaboration with the editor. Authors and institutions may request a retraction of their articles if their reasons meet the criteria for retraction.

The COPE retraction guidelines can be found on the COPE website.

- If there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication or image manipulation) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error).
- If the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross referencing, permission or justification (e.g. cases of redundant publication or duplicate publication).
- If the research constitutes plagiarism.
- Where there is evidence of fraudulent authorship.
- Where there is evidence of compromised peer review.
- If there is evidence of unethical research.

Where the decision has been taken to retract an article Life in Silico will:

- Add a “retracted” watermark to the published finalized paper of the article.
- Issue a separate retraction statement, titled ‘Retraction: [article title]’, that will be linked to the retracted article on Life in Silico.
- Paginate and make available the retraction statement in the online issue of the journal.

Expressions of concern

In some cases, an Expression of Concern notice may be considered where concerns of a major nature have been raised (e.g. serious research or publication misconduct), but where the outcome of the investigation is inconclusive or where due to various complexities the investigation will not be complete for a considerable time.

When the investigation has been completed a Retraction or Correction notice may follow the Expression of Concern, and alongside the original article, all will remain part of the permanent published record.

Publication of an expression of concern notice will be considered if:

- There is inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors, but the nature of the concerns warrant notifying the readers.
- There are well-founded concerns that the findings are unreliable or that misconduct may have occurred, but there is limited cooperation from the authors’ institution(s) in investigating the concerns raised.
- There is an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication that has not been, or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive.
- An investigation is underway, but a judgement will not be available for a considerable time and the nature of the concerns warrant notifying the readers.

The expression of concern will be linked back to the published article it relates to.

Article removal

An article removal will be issued in rare circumstances where the problems are very serious in nature and cannot be addressed by a Retraction or Correction notice. Life in Silico will consider removal of a published article in very limited circumstances such as:

- If the article contains content that could pose a serious risk if followed or acted upon.
- If the article contains content which violates the rights to privacy of a study participant.
- If the article is defamatory or infringes other legal rights.
- If an article is subject to a court order.

In case of an article being removed from Life in Silico, a removal notice will be issued in its place.

Updates and scholarly discussion on published articles


An addendum is a notification of an addition of information to an article. Addenda do not contradict the original publication and are not used to fix errors (for which a Correction notice will be published), but if the author needs to update or add some key information then, this can be published as an addendum. Addenda may be peer reviewed, according to journal policy, and are normally subject to oversight by the editors of the journal.

All addenda are electronically linked to the published article to which they relate.

Comment (including response and rejoinder correspondence)

Comments are short articles which outline an observation on a published article. In cases where a comment on a published article is submitted to the journal editor, it may be subject to peer review. The comment will be shared with the authors of the published article, who are invited to submit a response.

This author response again may be subject to peer review, and will be shared with the commentator, who may be invited to submit a rejoinder. The rejoinder may be subject to peer review and shared with the authors of the published article. No further correspondence will be considered for publication. The editor may decide to reject correspondence at any point before the comment, response and rejoinder are finalized.

All published comments, responses, and rejoinders are linked to the published article to which they relate.

Process for identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct

The publisher and the Editor-in-Chief (Assoc. Prof. Dr. Erman Salih ISTIFLI) of Life in Silico in collaboration with the editorial board members will take reasonable steps which comprise technological and personal knowledge available to identify and block the publication of manuscripts where research misconduct has arisen, containing citation manipulation, plagiarism, and data falsification/fabrication among others.

Life in Silico follows COPE's guidelines in dealing with allegations.