1. Overview
The International Journal of Responsible Machine Learning (IJRML) relies on the expertise and integrity of peer reviewers to uphold our mission of advancing responsible, ethical, and transparent machine learning research.
Reviewers play a crucial role in ensuring that published work meets the highest standards of rigour, reproducibility, and social impact. We are deeply grateful for your contribution to the community.
2. Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:
- Provide constructive, balanced, and respectful feedback
- Assess submissions confidentially and objectively
- Complete reviews within the agreed timeline (typically 3–4 weeks)
- Declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review
- Avoid using or sharing submitted content for any purpose outside of review
3. Evaluation Criteria
Submissions should be assessed using the following criteria:
Relevance
- Does the paper align with IJRML’s scope on responsible, ethical, and transparent ML?
Originality and Contribution
- Does the submission offer novel insights, methods, or applications?
- Is the contribution meaningful and non-trivial?
Technical Quality
- Are the methods sound, validated, and described clearly?
- Are theoretical claims or empirical results justified?
Clarity and Structure
- Is the manuscript well-organised and clearly written?
- Are the assumptions, limitations, and findings transparent?
Ethical Reflection
- Does the paper address potential harms, fairness, or social impact?
- Are responsible research considerations present or needed?
Reproducibility
- Are code, data, or simulations available or well-documented?
- Can the results reasonably be replicated?
4. Review Format
Reviews should typically include:
- Brief summary of the paper
- Major strengths
- Major concerns or issues (with specific references to sections, methods, or claims)
- Minor issues (e.g., typos, formatting, unclear phrasing)
- Recommendation: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject
Optional:
- Suggestions for improving responsible research practices in the paper
5. Double-Blind Process
6. Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must recuse themselves if any of the following apply:
- Recent (within 3 years) collaboration with the author(s)
- Shared institutional affiliation
- Advisor/advisee relationships (past or present)
- Close personal or financial relationships
- Any other circumstance that may impair objectivity
If in doubt, please disclose the situation to the Editor-in-Chief before proceeding.
7. Recognition and Acknowledgement
We value your time and effort. Reviewers may choose to:
8. Reviewer Ethics
IJRML endorses the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines and expects reviewers to:
Maintain confidentiality
Avoid plagiarism or misuse of reviewed material
Refrain from personal or dismissive language