Jurnal Ilmu Komputer dan Informatika (JIKI) supports constructive and responsible scholarly discussion of articles after publication. Peer review does not end at publication. Post-publication discussion lets readers, researchers, and the wider academic community ask questions, offer evidence-based critique, report reproducibility findings, and discuss the results and implications of published work.

JIKI is committed to facilitating discussion grounded in academic integrity, objectivity, transparency, and respect for everyone involved, in line with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Scope of Discussion

Post-publication discussion may include:

• Questions or requests for clarification about the methods, data, algorithms, experimental settings, analyses, or interpretation of results.
• Scientific critique of the methodological approach, evaluation design, arguments, or conclusions.
• Reproducibility and replication reports, including:
  • Attempts to reproduce the reported results using the described methods, data, or code.
  • Discrepancies between reported results and independently obtained results.
  • Sensitivity of findings to random seeds, data splits, hyperparameters, or computing environments.
• Issues with research artefacts, such as missing, inaccessible, or inconsistent source code, datasets, pre-trained models, or supplementary materials, including broken repository links.
• Additional evidence, such as new findings, datasets, or benchmark results relevant to the published article.
• Identification of possible errors, inconsistencies, or shortcomings that may affect the understanding or reliability of the article. Examples include errors in equations, algorithms, evaluation metrics, or reported figures and tables.
• Discussion of implications for theory, methods, practice, or future research.

Comments must be relevant to the scientific content of the article and aim to advance knowledge.

2. How to Submit a Comment

Readers or researchers who wish to contribute to post-publication discussion may contact the JIKI editorial team at [journal email address] with the following information:

1. The title, authors, and DOI of the article being discussed.
2. The name, affiliation, and contact details of the commenter. Anonymous comments will not be published, but substantiated concerns may be considered under Section 5.
3. A clear and structured description of the comment, question, critique, or finding.
4. Relevant references, data, code, or other supporting evidence. For reproducibility reports, include a description of the experimental setup, the software and hardware environment, and, where possible, a link to the code and data used.
5. A declaration of any conflict of interest relevant to the comment.

Comments intended for publication should be concise and focus on the main scientific points. As a guide, they should generally not exceed [1,500] words and [10] references.

If the journal system offers a comment or discussion feature on article pages, readers may use it according to the instructions provided. Submitting a comment does not guarantee that it will be published.

3. Review and Moderation of Comments

The editor will assess each comment submitted for publication for scientific relevance, clarity of argument, compliance with ethical standards, and adequacy of supporting evidence.

The editor may ask the commenter for revisions, clarification, or additional references before deciding whether to publish. Where necessary, JIKI may seek the opinion of independent experts or reviewers, for example to verify a reproducibility claim.

Comments must be professional, objective, and respectful towards the authors of the article. JIKI will not publish comments that contain:

• Personal attacks, insults, threats, harassment, or discriminatory language.
• Unsubstantiated accusations of misconduct.
• Commercial promotion or irrelevant self-promotion.
• Confidential or personal information about any individual.
• Content that otherwise breaches academic ethics.

4. Authors’ Right of Reply

When a comment directly concerns the methods, data, code, results, or conclusions of an article, JIKI will give the authors the opportunity to respond before the comment is published.

The authors’ response should address the scientific substance of the comment, be supported by relevant arguments or evidence, and follow accepted standards of academic communication. Where appropriate, authors are encouraged to provide additional data, code, or experimental details to clarify the issues raised.

If the editor considers it valuable to the scientific community, the comment and the authors’ reply may be published together as a Comment and Reply, each with its own DOI and linked to the original article. If the authors do not respond within a reasonable period, the editor may publish the comment without a reply and note that the authors were invited to respond.

5. Possible Errors or Ethical Concerns

When post-publication discussion reveals possible substantial errors, unreliable data or results, plagiarism (including code plagiarism), fabrication, falsification, or other breaches of research and publication ethics, JIKI will handle the matter under its Allegation of Research Misconduct policy and other relevant publication ethics policies.

Depending on the outcome, JIKI may:

• Request clarification from the authors.
• Publish a Correction (Erratum or Corrigendum).
• Publish an Expression of Concern.
• Retract the article if the criteria for retraction are met.

JIKI also monitors credible concerns raised about its articles on external platforms and in other scholarly forums, and will handle them through the same procedures.

A comment or critique does not in itself prove an error or misconduct. Every concern is assessed objectively on the basis of the available evidence.

6. Research Artefacts After Publication

Authors who make source code, datasets, or models available are encouraged to:

• Archive the exact version used in the published study in a persistent repository with a DOI or permanent identifier.
• Keep repository links accessible and respond to reasonable requests for clarification about their artefacts.

Later updates to code or data should not alter the version cited in the article. If an error in the published artefacts affects the reported results, the authors should notify the journal so that a correction can be considered.

7. Transparency and Editorial Independence

JIKI handles post-publication discussion fairly, transparently, and independently. Decisions to publish comments or replies are based on scientific relevance, quality of argument, supporting evidence, and compliance with publication ethics.

If an editor has a conflict of interest relating to a discussion, they must disclose it and, where necessary, hand the matter over to an independent editor.

8. Commitment to Scholarly Dialogue

JIKI regards post-publication discussion as a way to strengthen the quality of published research, improve scientific rigour and reproducibility, clarify the interpretation of findings, and encourage further research.

All participants are expected to act professionally, respect differences of scientific opinion, and base their contributions on evidence and sound argument.