This scientific code of ethics statement is a statement of the code of ethics of all parties involved in the publication process of the Scientific Journal of Mathematics (JIMAT), namely managers, editors, reviewers, and authors. This statement of the code of ethics for scientific publications is based on the Regulation of the Head of LIPI Number 5 of 2014 concerning the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications, which in essence the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications essentially upholds three ethical values in publication, namely:

• Neutrality, which is free from conflicts of interest in the management of publications.
• Justice, which is to give authorship rights to those who have the right as authors/writers; and
• Honesty, which is free from duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (DF2P) in publications.

Editorial Responsibilities

1. Publication Decisions: The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which submitted manuscripts will be published. The decision is based on the manuscript’s validity, relevance to researchers and readers, and compliance with legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
2. Fair Play: Editors evaluate manuscripts solely on their intellectual merit, without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.
3. Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.
4. Conflicts of Interest: Editors must recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

Reviewer Responsibilities

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and may also help authors improve their manuscripts through constructive communication.
2. Promptness: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research or knows that a timely review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.
3. Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
4. Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively, and personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited by the authors. If they detect substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work, they must alert the editor.
6. Conflicts of Interest: Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the author’s explicit consent. Reviewers must decline manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions related to the papers.

Author Responsibilities

1. Reporting Standards: Authors must present an accurate account of their research work as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Data must be represented accurately in the paper. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior.
2. Data Access and Retention: Authors should be prepared to provide the raw data related to their paper for editorial review and must be willing to provide public access to such data where possible, and in any case should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited.
4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: Authors must not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical publishing behavior.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
6. Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All significant contributors should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects should be acknowledged as contributors. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission.
7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.