Vehicle Engine  adheres to recognized publication ethics standards, firmly upholds and promotes academic integrity, and formulates ethical guidelines for authors, reviewers, and editors based on the Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, the *Academic Publishing Standards—Definition of Academic Misconduct in Journals (CY/T 174—2019)*, the COPE Guidelines on Ethical Publishing Practices, and the journal’s practical circumstances.

1. Responsibilities of Authors

Manuscript content must comply with national laws and regulations, meet the requirements outlined in the journal’s "Submission Guidelines," and ensure that the submitted work is original, free of confidential information, and devoid of academic misconduct such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or falsification.

Authors must ensure the scientific accuracy, objectivity, and clarity of their manuscripts and take full responsibility for the content.

Authors must objectively evaluate others’ research and provide proper citations in their manuscripts.

All authors must meet the journal’s authorship criteria. After submission, changes to the author list or order are not permitted. Submitting authors must obtain consent from all co-authors prior to submission. Third-party writing or submission is prohibited. Listing individuals without substantive academic contributions as authors is strictly opposed.

Funding information relevant to the study must be disclosed in the manuscript. Irrelevant funding details are prohibited.

Authors must respect reviewers’ feedback and revise the manuscript accordingly. Dissenting opinions may be appealed to the editorial office.

If authors identify errors or omissions in a published paper, they must promptly notify the editorial office for correction or retraction.

Authors must confirm that the manuscript is not under multiple submissions. If the work has been published in any form (including in different languages) or has overlapping content with other published or translated works, this must be declared during submission.

2. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must complete evaluations within the stipulated timeframe and provide feedback to the editorial office. If unable to meet deadlines, they must inform the editorial office promptly and may not delegate reviews to students or colleagues.

Evaluations must be scientific, accurate, and objective, focusing solely on academic merit. Reviewers must avoid personal critiques and provide detailed suggestions to improve the manuscript.

Reviewers must report suspected academic misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, multiple submissions) to the editorial office immediately.

Reviews must not be influenced by the author’s gender, ethnicity, seniority, affiliation, geographic location, or institutional background.

Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the manuscript and refrain from unauthorized use of the research.

Reviewers must recuse themselves if they have competitive, collaborative, or conflicting interests with the authors or related entities.

3. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors must strictly comply with national laws and regulations, uphold academic ethics, maintain research integrity, process submissions fairly and promptly, and ensure timely, high-quality publication.

Editors must remain impartial, accepting or rejecting manuscripts based solely on scientific merit, innovation, and alignment with the journal’s scope. Bias based on authors’ affiliations, gender, title, academic honors, or geographic location is prohibited.

Editors must enforce a double-blind peer review system, ensuring anonymity for authors, reviewers, and other relevant parties during the review process.

Editors must respect the confidentiality of manuscripts and avoid unauthorized use of authors’ research.

Editors must respect both authors’ and reviewers’ opinions. Authors may appeal if they disagree with review outcomes.

Editors must respect authors’ perspectives and writing styles. Any critical revisions involving academic viewpoints must be approved by the authors.

Editors should encourage academic debate and foster diverse scholarly discourse.