1. Policy Statement

BIMA encourages constructive academic dialogue about published research in artificial intelligence, machine learning, deep learning, intelligent systems, algorithms, and related computational fields. The purpose of this policy is to support the exchange of scientific knowledge, promote careful interpretation of research results, and help maintain the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.

Post-publication discussions are received through the journal's official editorial communication channels. The editorial team assesses each submission on its merits and determines whether clarification, a response from the original authors, further investigation, or another appropriate action is warranted.

2. Scope of Discussion

Post-publication discussions may address matters such as:

All discussions must be relevant to the scholarly content of the article and presented in a professional, objective, and respectful manner. Claims should be supported by clear reasoning, appropriate evidence, and references where available. Personal attacks, abusive language, and unsupported allegations are not appropriate.

3. Submission of Discussions

Readers, researchers, authors, and other interested parties who wish to raise a scholarly question or comment about an article published in BIMA may contact the editorial team through the journal's official contact channel provided on the BIMA website.

To facilitate an appropriate assessment, the submission should include:

• The title and DOI or URL of the published article, where available.
• The name of the corresponding author or the article's publication details, if known.
• A clear explanation of the question, comment, or concern.
• Supporting evidence, relevant data, or references, where applicable.
• The sender's name and contact information for possible follow-up.

4. Editorial Assessment and Follow-Up

The editorial team reviews submitted discussions to determine their relevance, clarity, and potential significance to the published article. Depending on the nature of the issue, the editor may request further information, consult an appropriate subject expert, or invite the authors of the original article to provide a response.

Where a concern may affect the interpretation, accuracy, or reliability of the scholarly record, the editor will consider the available evidence and determine the appropriate next steps in accordance with the journal's relevant policies.

Submission of a discussion does not guarantee publication, a response from the original authors, or a particular editorial outcome. Decisions depend on the substance of the submission, the evidence available, and the potential implications for the published work.

5. Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct

Discussions submitted directly to the editorial team are handled as editorial communications. Their contents are not automatically published or made publicly available. Information is handled with appropriate discretion and used for the purpose of assessing the matter raised.

When necessary to evaluate a concern, the editor may share relevant information with the original authors, qualified advisers, or other parties directly involved in the assessment. Any such communication should be limited to what is reasonably necessary to examine the issue.

Individuals submitting discussions are expected to act in good faith, provide accurate information, respect the rights of others, and avoid presenting speculation as established fact. The journal does not treat a critical comment, by itself, as evidence of research misconduct.

6. Relationship with Other BIMA Policies

Post-publication discussion is intended to facilitate scholarly communication. If a submission raises concerns about possible research or publication misconduct, the matter will be assessed under BIMA's applicable research misconduct policy.

If the assessment identifies a potential error or another issue that may require a formal change to a published article, the editor will consider the matter in accordance with the journal's correction and retraction policy.

Depending on the findings of the assessment, the appropriate response may involve clarification, a correction, a retraction, or no further action. Any decision will be based on the available evidence and the applicable editorial policies.