File size: 46,611 Bytes
1916d8e
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
{
  "schema_version": "1.0",
  "name": "ResearchBee curated chat knowledge",
  "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
  "principles": [
    "KU first-party policy and service pages take priority for KU-specific questions.",
    "Use live source lookups for policies, fees, agreements, metrics, and repository terms that can change.",
    "Never infer permission, eligibility, or trustworthiness from missing data.",
    "Journal fit and transparent practice come before ranking numbers.",
    "Sources and review dates must travel with retrieved knowledge.",
    "The general knowledge-file review date does not update separately dated KU policy snapshots; overdue policy records do not establish current eligibility."
  ],
  "entries": [
    {
      "id": "researchbee-services",
      "category": "researchbee",
      "title": "What ResearchBee can help with",
      "summary": "ResearchBee is Khalifa University Library's publishing and research-data assistant. It supports four connected needs: finding and comparing suitable journals; checking article self-archiving and repository rights; identifying appropriate research-data repositories; and answering questions about KU Open Access support, APCs, journal metrics, publishing practice, Khazna, and research data management. The structured tools should be used for journal matching, policy checking, and repository matching; the chat assistant should explain concepts, help users prepare, and interpret results.",
      "topics": [
        "researchbee",
        "services",
        "help",
        "what can you do",
        "chat",
        "tools"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU Journal Finder guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/journalfinder"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Research Data guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/researchdata"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU AI Tools guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/aitools"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 90
    },
    {
      "id": "ku-first-party-guides",
      "category": "ku",
      "title": "KU Library guides are the first source for local services",
      "summary": "For KU-specific questions, prioritize the current KU Library guide or policy over general external guidance. Use the AI Tools guide for tools available to KU users, the Journal Finder guide for journal-discovery and verification resources, the Research Data guide for local RDM guidance, and the Open Access guide for KU funding, publisher agreements, and deposit support. If a guide and an older chatbot record differ, the current KU page or policy is authoritative.",
      "topics": [
        "ku",
        "khalifa university",
        "library guide",
        "ai tools",
        "journal finder guide",
        "research data guide"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU AI Tools guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/aitools"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Journal Finder guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/journalfinder"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Research Data guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/researchdata"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Open Access guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/oa"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 30
    },
    {
      "id": "journal-selection-workflow",
      "category": "journals",
      "title": "A reliable workflow for choosing a journal",
      "summary": "Choose a journal in stages rather than by one ranking number. First define the paper's topic, contribution, article type, methods, audience, and practical constraints. Next identify journals that publish closely related work and read their aims, scope, recent articles, and author instructions. Then verify indexing and title status in the source database, compare category-specific metrics, check peer-review and publication-ethics information, review access model, APCs, licences, waivers, and self-archiving rights, and confirm length, data, reporting, and submission requirements. Make a primary, secondary, and safer backup choice.",
      "topics": [
        "best journal",
        "choose journal",
        "where to publish",
        "journal selection",
        "shortlist",
        "suitable journal"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU Journal Finder guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/journalfinder"
        },
        {
          "name": "Think. Check. Submit. journal checklist",
          "url": "https://thinkchecksubmit.org/journals/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library and cross-sector publishing guidance",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 180
    },
    {
      "id": "journal-fit-scope-audience",
      "category": "journals",
      "title": "Journal fit: scope, audience, contribution, and article type",
      "summary": "Topical fit is necessary but not sufficient. Check whether the journal's stated scope covers the manuscript's main question, methods, population or application area, and article type. Compare the manuscript with several recent papers, especially papers using similar methods or addressing a similar audience. A strong match should be easy to explain in one or two sentences: what the paper contributes, why the journal's readers need it, and how it extends work the journal already publishes. A high-ranked journal with weak scope fit is usually a poorer submission choice than a well-matched journal with appropriate reach.",
      "topics": [
        "journal scope",
        "audience",
        "article type",
        "fit",
        "aims and scope",
        "recent articles",
        "manuscript match"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU Journal Finder guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/journalfinder"
        },
        {
          "name": "Think. Check. Submit. journal checklist",
          "url": "https://thinkchecksubmit.org/journals/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library and cross-sector publishing guidance",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 180
    },
    {
      "id": "journal-indexing-verification",
      "category": "journals",
      "title": "Verify journal indexing and current title status",
      "summary": "Never rely only on a journal website's claim that it is indexed. Verify the exact title and ISSN in the relevant source list, and check the years of coverage, active or discontinued status, title changes, and predecessor or successor relationships. Scopus and Web of Science are separate databases with different selection systems and coverage. A journal may be indexed in one, both, or neither. Indexing is evidence of database coverage, not a guarantee that every article is high quality or that the journal is the right fit for a manuscript.",
      "topics": [
        "indexed",
        "indexing",
        "scopus indexed",
        "web of science",
        "master journal list",
        "discontinued",
        "issn",
        "title status"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "Scopus content coverage guide",
          "url": "https://www.elsevier.com/products/scopus/content"
        },
        {
          "name": "Web of Science Master Journal List",
          "url": "https://mjl.clarivate.com/home"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Journal Finder guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/journalfinder"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Database providers and KU Library",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 90
    },
    {
      "id": "citescore-percentile-quartile",
      "category": "metrics",
      "title": "CiteScore, percentile, rank, and quartile",
      "summary": "CiteScore is a Scopus journal-level citation-impact metric based on citations and peer-reviewed documents in a four-year window. The raw CiteScore should not be used to compare different subject fields because citation practices differ. CiteScore Percentile shows a title's relative position within a specific Scopus subject category; for example, the 90th percentile means the title performs above about 90 percent of titles in that category. Quartiles group category rankings into Q1 through Q4. Always state the metric year, database, and subject category, because one journal can have different percentiles or quartiles in different categories.",
      "topics": [
        "citescore",
        "percentile",
        "quartile",
        "q1",
        "q2",
        "q3",
        "q4",
        "scopus rank",
        "top 10 percent",
        "top 15 percent"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "Scopus Support: What is CiteScore?",
          "url": "https://www.elsevier.support/scopus/answer/what-is-citescore"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Open Access ratings guidance",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/oa/ratings"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Scopus and KU Library",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "sjr-snip",
      "category": "metrics",
      "title": "SJR and SNIP provide complementary views",
      "summary": "SCImago Journal Rank, or SJR, weights citations according to the influence of the citing sources and is useful as one view of journal prestige within a network. Source Normalized Impact per Paper, or SNIP, adjusts citation impact for differences in a field's citation potential. They answer different questions and should be interpreted with CiteScore percentile, journal scope, coverage, and qualitative evidence. Report the year and source of every value, and avoid treating small differences as meaningful without considering the journal's field, size, age, and publication mix.",
      "topics": [
        "sjr",
        "scimago journal rank",
        "snip",
        "source normalized impact",
        "prestige",
        "field normalized"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "Scopus journal metrics guidance",
          "url": "https://www.elsevier.com/products/scopus/metrics"
        },
        {
          "name": "SCImago Journal and Country Rank",
          "url": "https://www.scimagojr.com"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Metric providers",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "jif-jci-jcr",
      "category": "metrics",
      "title": "Journal Impact Factor, Journal Citation Indicator, and JCR",
      "summary": "Journal Citation Reports provides several journal-level indicators. The Journal Impact Factor summarizes citations to recent journal content, while the Journal Citation Indicator provides a field-normalized view. These indicators can help compare journals within suitable contexts, but they are not measures of the quality of an individual article, author, or institution. Use category benchmarks and multiple complementary indicators, and pair the numbers with scope, editorial practice, audience, publication model, and evidence from recent articles.",
      "topics": [
        "impact factor",
        "jif",
        "journal citation indicator",
        "jci",
        "journal citation reports",
        "jcr",
        "clarivate"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "Clarivate Journal Citation Reports",
          "url": "https://clarivate.com/academia-government/scientific-and-academic-research/research-funding-analytics/journal-citation-reports/"
        },
        {
          "name": "DORA responsible indicators guidance",
          "url": "https://sfdora.org/resource/guidance-on-the-responsible-use-of-quantitative-indicators-in-research-assessment/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Clarivate and DORA",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "responsible-use-of-metrics",
      "category": "metrics",
      "title": "Use journal metrics responsibly",
      "summary": "No single number captures journal quality, research quality, or manuscript fit. Be clear about the decision the metric supports, transparent about its source and year, specific about what it measures, contextual about disciplinary differences, and fair about limitations. Do not infer the quality of an individual paper or researcher from the average citation performance of the journal. For journal selection, fit and trustworthiness come first; metrics are supporting evidence, not the decision by themselves.",
      "topics": [
        "responsible metrics",
        "dora",
        "metric limitations",
        "journal quality",
        "research quality",
        "ranking mechanism"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "DORA responsible indicators guidance",
          "url": "https://sfdora.org/resource/guidance-on-the-responsible-use-of-quantitative-indicators-in-research-assessment/"
        },
        {
          "name": "Clarivate Journal Citation Reports",
          "url": "https://clarivate.com/academia-government/scientific-and-academic-research/research-funding-analytics/journal-citation-reports/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Responsible research assessment guidance",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "journal-trust-checklist",
      "category": "integrity",
      "title": "Check whether a journal is trustworthy",
      "summary": "Check the journal's identity, publisher, contact details, editorial board, peer-review description, ownership, fees, waivers, licences, copyright, archiving, complaints and appeals, conflicts of interest, corrections and retractions, and preservation. Verify indexing and memberships independently rather than accepting logos on the website. For an open-access journal, check its DOAJ record where applicable. Warning signs include guaranteed or implausibly rapid acceptance, hidden charges, copied or confusing journal names, unverifiable editors, aggressive invitations unrelated to the author's field, and false metric claims. No single list or signal should be the sole decision.",
      "topics": [
        "predatory journal",
        "trusted journal",
        "trustworthy",
        "scam journal",
        "journal legitimacy",
        "think check submit",
        "doaj",
        "cope"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "Think. Check. Submit. journal checklist",
          "url": "https://thinkchecksubmit.org/journals/"
        },
        {
          "name": "DOAJ Principles of Transparency and Best Practice",
          "url": "https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/"
        },
        {
          "name": "COPE Core Principles",
          "url": "https://publicationethics.org/core-principles"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Cross-sector publishing integrity guidance",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 180
    },
    {
      "id": "peer-review-and-editorial-transparency",
      "category": "integrity",
      "title": "Peer review and editorial transparency",
      "summary": "A journal should explain the type of peer review it uses, who makes editorial decisions, how conflicts of interest are handled, and how complaints, appeals, corrections, retractions, and misconduct concerns are managed. Editorial-board names and affiliations should be credible and relevant to the field. Peer-review speed varies by discipline and manuscript complexity, so advertised timelines are estimates rather than guarantees. A promise of acceptance or publication without meaningful review is a serious warning sign.",
      "topics": [
        "peer review",
        "editorial board",
        "review time",
        "acceptance guarantee",
        "complaints",
        "appeals",
        "retraction"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "COPE Core Principles",
          "url": "https://publicationethics.org/core-principles"
        },
        {
          "name": "DOAJ Principles of Transparency and Best Practice",
          "url": "https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/"
        },
        {
          "name": "Think. Check. Submit. journal checklist",
          "url": "https://thinkchecksubmit.org/journals/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Publication ethics organizations",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 180
    },
    {
      "id": "open-access-costs-and-licences",
      "category": "open-access",
      "title": "Compare access model, APCs, waivers, copyright, and licences",
      "summary": "Open access does not automatically mean that an author pays an APC. A journal may be fully open access, hybrid, subscription-based with Green OA options, or diamond open access with no author APC. Before submission, check the exact journal and article type, the current APC and taxes, waivers or discounts, institutional agreements, whether optional page or colour charges apply, who retains copyright, which Creative Commons licences are offered, and what each licence permits. KU funding eligibility is a separate question and must be checked against the current KU OA guide and publisher agreement.",
      "topics": [
        "apc",
        "open access fee",
        "waiver",
        "discount",
        "copyright",
        "creative commons",
        "cc by",
        "diamond oa",
        "hybrid",
        "gold oa"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU Open Access guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/oa"
        },
        {
          "name": "DOAJ Principles of Transparency and Best Practice",
          "url": "https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library and open-access standards",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 90
    },
    {
      "id": "special-issues",
      "category": "journals",
      "title": "Evaluate special issues separately",
      "summary": "A legitimate journal can still host a poorly managed special issue. Confirm that the special issue appears on the journal's official website, that guest editors are named and qualified, that the scope is coherent, and that normal peer-review, ethics, and editorial-oversight policies apply. Be cautious about unsolicited invitations, very broad topics, unrealistic deadlines, or claims of guaranteed publication. Also verify whether the issue's articles are indexed in the same way as regular content and whether the APC or licence differs.",
      "topics": [
        "special issue",
        "guest editor",
        "call for papers",
        "invitation",
        "themed issue"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "DOAJ Principles of Transparency and Best Practice",
          "url": "https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/"
        },
        {
          "name": "COPE Core Principles",
          "url": "https://publicationethics.org/core-principles"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Publication ethics organizations",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 180
    },
    {
      "id": "manuscript-readiness",
      "category": "publishing",
      "title": "Prepare the manuscript before selecting the final journal",
      "summary": "Clarify the research question, contribution, methods, main findings, limitations, audience, and article type before finalizing a journal shortlist. Use the reporting guideline appropriate to the study design where one exists, and make the abstract and title accurately reflect the work. Resolve authorship and contributorship early, check ethical approvals and conflicts, organize data and code, and prepare a data-availability statement. A polished, complete manuscript gives journal-matching tools better evidence and reduces avoidable desk rejection.",
      "topics": [
        "manuscript preparation",
        "reporting guideline",
        "equator",
        "desk rejection",
        "data availability statement",
        "authorship",
        "contributorship"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "EQUATOR reporting-guideline library",
          "url": "https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/"
        },
        {
          "name": "CRediT Contributor Role Taxonomy",
          "url": "https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles-defined/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Reporting and contributorship standards",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "cover-letter-and-submission",
      "category": "publishing",
      "title": "Submission and cover-letter essentials",
      "summary": "Follow the target journal's current author instructions exactly. A concise cover letter should identify the manuscript, state its central contribution and why it fits the journal's readership, confirm originality and submission status, and disclose any required ethics, conflicts, preprints, or related manuscripts. Do not repeat the entire abstract or make exaggerated claims. Before submission, confirm files, figures, tables, supplementary material, reporting checklist, author details, ORCID iDs, funding, contributor roles, and suggested or opposed reviewers where requested.",
      "topics": [
        "cover letter",
        "submission checklist",
        "author guidelines",
        "orcid",
        "credit roles",
        "submit manuscript"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "ORCID",
          "url": "https://orcid.org/"
        },
        {
          "name": "CRediT Contributor Role Taxonomy",
          "url": "https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles-defined/"
        },
        {
          "name": "EQUATOR reporting-guideline library",
          "url": "https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Research identifiers and reporting standards",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "revision-and-peer-review-response",
      "category": "publishing",
      "title": "Responding to peer review",
      "summary": "Read the decision letter and all reviews carefully, separate mandatory editorial requests from reviewer suggestions, and prepare a point-by-point response. Quote or summarize each comment, state exactly what changed and where, and explain respectfully when a requested change is not appropriate. Keep the revised manuscript, tracked or highlighted version, clean version, response letter, and supplementary files consistent. Never claim that a change was made when it was not, and alert the editor to conflicting or ethically problematic requests.",
      "topics": [
        "peer review response",
        "revision letter",
        "reviewer comments",
        "major revision",
        "minor revision",
        "resubmit"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "COPE Core Principles",
          "url": "https://publicationethics.org/core-principles"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Publication ethics guidance",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "open-access-versions",
      "category": "open-access",
      "title": "Preprint, accepted manuscript, and version of record",
      "summary": "A preprint or submitted manuscript is the author's version before formal peer review. The accepted author manuscript, often called the AAM or postprint, includes changes made through peer review but not the publisher's final layout. The version of record is the final published version. Publisher policies often allow different versions in different repositories, sometimes with an embargo or required statement. Do not infer permission from another journal by the same publisher. Check the exact title, version, repository type, embargo, licence, acknowledgement, and effective policy date.",
      "topics": [
        "preprint",
        "submitted version",
        "accepted manuscript",
        "aam",
        "postprint",
        "version of record",
        "vor",
        "manuscript version"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "Open Policy Finder",
          "url": "https://openpolicyfinder.jisc.ac.uk/"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Open Access guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/oa"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Jisc and KU Library",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 90
    },
    {
      "id": "open-policy-finder",
      "category": "open-access",
      "title": "Use Open Policy Finder for current journal and funder policies",
      "summary": "Open Policy Finder supports searches for journal, publisher, and funder open-access policies, funder-compliance information, and transitional agreements. Because these records can change, ResearchBee should use the live API for a specific journal whenever possible and label the result with its source and retrieval date. The answer must keep separate the manuscript version, permitted repository, embargo, licence or required statement, and any policy option or exception. If no reliable record is returned, say that the permission is unverified and direct the user to the current journal policy or library support rather than guessing.",
      "topics": [
        "open policy finder",
        "publisher policy",
        "funder policy",
        "transitional agreement",
        "self archiving policy",
        "embargo policy"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "Open Policy Finder",
          "url": "https://openpolicyfinder.jisc.ac.uk/"
        },
        {
          "name": "Open Policy Finder API guidance",
          "url": "https://openpolicyfinder.jisc.ac.uk/help/developers/how-to-access-the-api-platform"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Jisc",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 30
    },
    {
      "id": "green-oa-deposit-check",
      "category": "open-access",
      "title": "Green OA deposit decision checklist",
      "summary": "Before depositing an article, identify the exact journal and article, confirm the manuscript version available, check the permitted repository type, calculate any embargo from the correct event, apply the required licence or acknowledgement, and retain evidence of the policy used. Keep repository-holdings status separate from permission status: an article being absent from Khazna does not mean it may be deposited, and an existing metadata record does not prove that a particular full-text version is permitted. Use DOI-first article-level checking when available.",
      "topics": [
        "green oa",
        "deposit article",
        "khazna deposit",
        "self archive",
        "repository rights",
        "embargo calculation"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "Open Policy Finder",
          "url": "https://openpolicyfinder.jisc.ac.uk/"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Open Access guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/oa"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Jisc and KU Library",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 90
    },
    {
      "id": "rdm-overview-dmp",
      "category": "rdm",
      "title": "Research data management starts with a living plan",
      "summary": "A data management plan should be created early and updated as the project changes. It should describe the data and formats, collection or creation methods, documentation and metadata, quality assurance, storage and backup, access control and security, ethics and legal constraints, responsibilities, sharing and repository plans, licences, retention and preservation, and required resources or costs. The plan should align with KU, funder, collaborator, ethics, contractual, and disciplinary requirements. A DMP is an operational plan, not merely a form completed for a proposal.",
      "topics": [
        "data management plan",
        "dmp",
        "rdm",
        "research data management",
        "storage",
        "backup",
        "data sharing plan"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU Research Data guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/researchdata"
        },
        {
          "name": "DMPonline guidance",
          "url": "https://dmponline.dcc.ac.uk/help"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library and Digital Curation Centre",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 180
    },
    {
      "id": "fair-principles",
      "category": "rdm",
      "title": "Apply FAIR principles appropriately",
      "summary": "FAIR means Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable. It does not mean that all data must be openly accessible. Sensitive or restricted data can still be FAIR when metadata are discoverable, access conditions are clear, identifiers are persistent, standards and vocabularies are used, provenance is recorded, and legitimate access routes are described. Practical FAIR actions include rich metadata, a persistent identifier, documented formats and variables, clear licences or access terms, links between data and publications, and use of disciplinary standards where available.",
      "topics": [
        "fair data",
        "findable accessible interoperable reusable",
        "fair principles",
        "machine actionable",
        "open data"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "GO FAIR principles",
          "url": "https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Research Data guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/researchdata"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "FAIR principles and KU Library",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "repository-selection-workflow",
      "category": "repositories",
      "title": "How to choose a research-data repository",
      "summary": "Start with funder, publisher, ethics, collaboration, and institutional requirements. Prefer a reputable disciplinary repository when it serves the relevant community and accepts the data; otherwise consider a suitable generalist or institutional repository. Check scope, accepted content and formats, maximum size, costs, access options and embargoes, sensitive-data controls, licences, metadata quality, persistent identifiers, versioning, links to publications, review or curation, preservation commitment, withdrawal and tombstone policies, and export or API options. Verify all terms on the repository's current site before deposit.",
      "topics": [
        "choose repository",
        "data repository",
        "where to deposit data",
        "repository criteria",
        "generalist repository",
        "disciplinary repository"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU Research Data guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/researchdata"
        },
        {
          "name": "re3data",
          "url": "https://www.re3data.org/"
        },
        {
          "name": "FAIRsharing",
          "url": "https://fairsharing.org/"
        },
        {
          "name": "CoreTrustSeal",
          "url": "https://www.coretrustseal.org/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library and repository registries",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 90
    },
    {
      "id": "disciplinary-vs-generalist-repository",
      "category": "repositories",
      "title": "Disciplinary, generalist, and institutional repositories",
      "summary": "A disciplinary repository is often the strongest choice when it is trusted by the research community, supports appropriate metadata and file types, and is recognized by the funder or journal. A generalist repository can be suitable when no disciplinary repository fits or when mixed outputs need a common home. An institutional repository supports local stewardship and visibility but may have different collection scope, access controls, or data functionality. More than one service may be used when policies permit, but avoid creating ambiguous duplicate records; connect versions with persistent identifiers and clearly identify the authoritative record.",
      "topics": [
        "disciplinary repository",
        "subject repository",
        "generalist repository",
        "institutional repository",
        "khazna",
        "zenodo",
        "dryad",
        "figshare"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "re3data",
          "url": "https://www.re3data.org/"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Research Data guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/researchdata"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Repository registry and KU Library",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 180
    },
    {
      "id": "repository-trust-and-certification",
      "category": "repositories",
      "title": "Repository trust, preservation, and certification",
      "summary": "Trust depends on evidence such as a clear mission and governance, sustainable staffing and funding, transparent licences and terms, data integrity and authenticity controls, documented ingest and preservation workflows, security, access management, metadata and discovery, continuity planning, and support for the designated community. CoreTrustSeal certification is useful evidence that a repository has been assessed against core trustworthy-repository requirements, but lack of certification does not automatically make a repository unsuitable. Evaluate the repository's actual services and the needs of the dataset.",
      "topics": [
        "coretrustseal",
        "trusted repository",
        "trustworthy repository",
        "preservation",
        "certification",
        "repository sustainability"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "CoreTrustSeal requirements",
          "url": "https://www.coretrustseal.org/why-certification/requirements/"
        },
        {
          "name": "re3data",
          "url": "https://www.re3data.org/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Repository certification and registry",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "repository-registries",
      "category": "repositories",
      "title": "Use repository registries to discover candidates, then verify",
      "summary": "re3data can be searched or accessed programmatically to discover repositories by subject, country, content type, access, identifiers, certification, and other recorded attributes. FAIRsharing links repositories, standards, and data policies. Registry records are discovery aids, not substitutes for checking the repository's own current terms. ResearchBee should use registry identifiers to shortlist repositories and then present direct verification links for deposit rules, costs, size limits, licences, sensitive-data support, identifiers, and preservation.",
      "topics": [
        "re3data",
        "fairsharing",
        "repository registry",
        "repository directory",
        "repository api",
        "find repository"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "re3data",
          "url": "https://www.re3data.org/"
        },
        {
          "name": "re3data API",
          "url": "https://www.re3data.org/api/doc/"
        },
        {
          "name": "FAIRsharing",
          "url": "https://fairsharing.org/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Repository registries",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 90
    },
    {
      "id": "data-documentation-metadata-formats",
      "category": "rdm",
      "title": "Documentation, metadata, file formats, and README files",
      "summary": "A reusable dataset needs enough documentation for someone outside the project to understand what the files contain, how the data were created or processed, units and codes, missing values, software and version dependencies, quality checks, file relationships, and known limitations. Use a disciplinary metadata standard and controlled vocabularies when available. Prefer open, well-documented, non-proprietary or widely supported preservation formats when practical, while retaining necessary original files. Include a README, data dictionary or codebook, licence or access terms, provenance, and links to related software, protocols, and publications.",
      "topics": [
        "metadata",
        "readme",
        "data dictionary",
        "codebook",
        "file format",
        "documentation",
        "controlled vocabulary",
        "provenance"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "GO FAIR principles",
          "url": "https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/"
        },
        {
          "name": "KU Research Data guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/researchdata"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "FAIR principles and KU Library",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "sensitive-data",
      "category": "rdm",
      "title": "Sensitive, confidential, personal, and restricted data",
      "summary": "Do not upload sensitive or restricted data to a public repository merely to satisfy an open-data expectation. Follow ethics approval, informed consent, applicable law, KU policy, contracts, data-use agreements, and funder requirements. Consider data minimization, de-identification or anonymization, separation of identifiers, encryption, role-based access, secure transfer, retention and destruction rules, and controlled access. When data cannot be shared openly, publish a metadata record and a clear access statement where permitted, explaining what can be requested, by whom, under which conditions, and who reviews requests.",
      "topics": [
        "sensitive data",
        "personal data",
        "confidential",
        "patient data",
        "controlled access",
        "anonymization",
        "de-identification",
        "ethics"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU Research Data guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/researchdata"
        },
        {
          "name": "CoreTrustSeal requirements",
          "url": "https://www.coretrustseal.org/why-certification/requirements/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library and trustworthy repository guidance",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 90
    },
    {
      "id": "data-licensing-citation-pids",
      "category": "rdm",
      "title": "Data licences, citation, and persistent identifiers",
      "summary": "A data licence should match what the depositor is legally able and intends to permit; ownership, third-party material, consent, contracts, and database rights must be checked first. A persistent identifier such as a DOI helps users find and cite a stable dataset record, but persistence also requires the repository to maintain the landing page and metadata. Dataset citations should identify creators, year, title, repository or publisher, version where relevant, and persistent identifier. Link the dataset and article in both directions and document how updated versions relate to earlier ones.",
      "topics": [
        "data licence",
        "data license",
        "dataset doi",
        "persistent identifier",
        "pid",
        "data citation",
        "cite dataset",
        "versioning"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "DataCite DOI basics",
          "url": "https://support.datacite.org/docs/doi-basics"
        },
        {
          "name": "DataCite data citation",
          "url": "https://support.datacite.org/docs/data-citation"
        },
        {
          "name": "GO FAIR principles",
          "url": "https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "DataCite and FAIR principles",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "data-versioning-and-preservation",
      "category": "rdm",
      "title": "Version datasets and plan for preservation",
      "summary": "Decide what constitutes a new dataset version and record the change history. Minor metadata corrections may not require the same treatment as changes to files or data values; follow the repository's versioning model. Keep identifiers and relationships clear so users can locate the latest version and reproduce the version cited in a paper. Preservation planning should identify which data, software, documentation, and formats must be retained, for how long, who is responsible, and how integrity, migration, access, and repository continuity will be managed.",
      "topics": [
        "data version",
        "dataset versioning",
        "preservation",
        "retention",
        "checksums",
        "tombstone",
        "long term access"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "CoreTrustSeal requirements",
          "url": "https://www.coretrustseal.org/why-certification/requirements/"
        },
        {
          "name": "DataCite DOI persistence",
          "url": "https://support.datacite.org/docs/doi-persistence"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Repository trust and PID guidance",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "orcid-and-credit",
      "category": "publishing",
      "title": "Use ORCID and CRediT for identity and contributions",
      "summary": "An ORCID iD is a persistent identifier for an individual researcher and helps connect the person with affiliations, publications, datasets, funding, peer review, and other research activities across systems. CRediT is a taxonomy of 14 contributor roles that can describe who did what in a research output. CRediT complements rather than decides authorship. Confirm authorship and author order using the relevant journal and disciplinary criteria, obtain agreement from all contributors, and keep contributor statements accurate and consistent across submission systems and the manuscript.",
      "topics": [
        "orcid",
        "credit taxonomy",
        "contributor roles",
        "authorship",
        "author order",
        "researcher identifier"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "ORCID",
          "url": "https://orcid.org/"
        },
        {
          "name": "CRediT Contributor Role Taxonomy",
          "url": "https://credit.niso.org/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "Research identifier and contributorship standards",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 365
    },
    {
      "id": "responsible-ai-for-research",
      "category": "ai",
      "title": "Use AI tools responsibly in research and publishing",
      "summary": "Use only tools appropriate for the sensitivity and confidentiality of the material. Do not upload unpublished manuscripts, personal data, confidential peer-review material, or restricted research information to an unapproved service. Verify every generated reference, quotation, factual claim, calculation, and summary against the original source. Human authors remain responsible for accuracy, originality, attribution, ethics, and compliance. Check the target journal, funder, and KU requirements for disclosure of AI-assisted work, and describe material use transparently when required.",
      "topics": [
        "ai tools",
        "generative ai",
        "chatgpt",
        "ai disclosure",
        "hallucinated references",
        "confidential manuscript",
        "responsible ai"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU AI Tools guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/aitools"
        },
        {
          "name": "COPE AI in publishing resources",
          "url": "https://publicationethics.org/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library and publication ethics guidance",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 90
    },
    {
      "id": "research-analytics-tools",
      "category": "analytics",
      "title": "Choose the right research analytics tool",
      "summary": "Use Scopus or Web of Science for source verification, citation searching, author and organization profiles, and journal-level metrics available in each database. Use Journal Citation Reports for JIF, JCI, category benchmarks, and related journal intelligence. Use SciVal for broader institutional, collaboration, topic, and benchmarking analyses based on Scopus data. Results differ because databases have different coverage, data models, disambiguation, and update schedules. State the database, retrieval date, search strategy, filters, and metric definitions in any formal analysis.",
      "topics": [
        "scopus",
        "web of science",
        "scival",
        "research analytics",
        "citation analysis",
        "h index",
        "fwci",
        "benchmarking"
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "name": "KU Journal Finder guide",
          "url": "https://library.ku.ac.ae/journalfinder"
        },
        {
          "name": "Clarivate Journal Citation Reports",
          "url": "https://clarivate.com/academia-government/scientific-and-academic-research/research-funding-analytics/journal-citation-reports/"
        },
        {
          "name": "Scopus",
          "url": "https://www.scopus.com/"
        }
      ],
      "authority": "KU Library and database providers",
      "reviewed": "2026-09-09",
      "review_cycle_days": 180
    }
  ]
}