Peer Review Process

High-Performance Distributed Computing Review follows a peer review process designed to evaluate the originality, technical quality, performance relevance, methodological soundness, scalability, reproducibility, clarity, and ethical compliance of submitted manuscripts.

Initial Editorial Check

After submission, the editorial office checks whether the manuscript fits the journal scope and meets basic submission requirements. Manuscripts may be returned to authors for correction before review if required information is missing.

Scope and Quality Assessment

The editor assesses the manuscript for relevance to high-performance computing, distributed systems, parallel computing, cloud platforms, edge computing, grid computing, scalable architectures, resource management, performance optimization, and computational infrastructure. Manuscripts outside the scope may be rejected without external review.

Reviewer Assignment

Suitable manuscripts are sent to independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are asked to evaluate methodology, originality, technical correctness, performance metrics, architecture, benchmarks, experimental setup, reproducibility, results, presentation, references, and contribution to the field.

Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer comments and editorial evaluation, the manuscript may be accepted, sent for minor revision, sent for major revision, rejected, or subjected to further review.

Revisions

Authors should respond to reviewer and editor comments clearly. Revised manuscripts should include appropriate changes and a response explaining how each comment has been addressed.

Final Decision

The editor makes the final decision based on manuscript quality, reviewer feedback, author responses, ethical compliance, technical contribution, and relevance to the journal.