The Unified Smart Scholarly Publishing System
Trust in the researcher is the starting point; publication opens the scholarly conversation; peer review is a continuing process, not a waiting gate.
Smart scholarly publishing: an epistemic model for a new era
Scholarly publishing is no longer merely an administrative track that ends in a decision to accept or reject. It has become part of a living knowledge system that calls for the timely circulation of ideas, transparent evaluation and continuing review.
In the age of artificial intelligence, as scientific change accelerates and research tools and standards evolve at an unprecedented pace, models that keep researchers waiting for long periods before sharing their findings with the scholarly community deserve to be reconsidered.
We hold that trust in the researcher should be the point of departure, that scholarly responsibility does not end at publication, and that peer review can be a continuous process, open to refinement and correction.
Digital Al-Jazari for Artificial Intelligence and Research Innovation (DJAIRI) has therefore adopted the Unified Smart Scholarly Publishing System, a model that combines timely publication with scholarly accountability, post-publication evaluation and transparency. It does not set academic standards aside; it reorganises them so that they respond to the pace of epistemic and technological change.
Two distinct stages
| Editorial screening before publication | Peer review after publication | |
|---|---|---|
| When | Before the paper is made available to readers | After publication, as a continuing process |
| What is assessed | Fit with the journal’s scope, completeness, sound referencing, and the absence of plagiarism or evident ethical breaches | The scholarly merit, methods and findings of the paper, through specialist review |
| Who decides | The editorial board (a human decision) | Specialist reviewers, with the outcome confirmed by the editors |
| What readers see | A published paper marked “Under review” | The actual review status, its date and any public notes |
Review status shown on every paper
- Awaiting review / Under review: published after editorial screening; scholarly review not yet completed.
- Revision requested: reviewers have asked for changes; the paper remains available with this status shown.
- Revised: the author has submitted a revised version.
- Peer reviewed: the paper has passed scholarly review. No paper is described as peer reviewed before it has actually been reviewed.
Corrections, retractions and post-publication comments
- Corrections: substantive errors are addressed in a dated correction notice linked to the paper; earlier versions remain on record.
- Retractions: a paper is retracted where plagiarism, fabrication or serious ethical misconduct is established; its page remains, with a clear retraction notice stating the reason.
- Scholarly comments: the editors receive post-publication comments through the contact page and invite the author to respond; approved public notes are shown alongside the review status.
- Human responsibility: decisions to publish, correct or retract are taken by human editors. AI tools in the system assist with conversion, formatting and checks; they do not replace scholarly judgement.
The researcher’s journey at a glance
- Create a researcher account or sign in.
- Upload the paper as an unnumbered Word file; the system converts it to PDF and paginates it continuously.
- Editorial screening, then payment of the publication fee (46 USD via PayPal).
- Publication, with a certificate and letter of publication carrying a verification code.
- Post-publication peer review, with its status shown to readers.