Peer Review Process

The Latin American Journal of Mathematics (LAJM) employs a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation.

1. Initial Screening (Desk Review) Upon submission, manuscripts are pre-evaluated by the Executive Editors. At this stage, the submission is screened for adherence to formatting guidelines, relevance to the journal’s scope, significance, originality, and methodological depth.

  • Approved manuscripts proceed to merit evaluation.

  • Rejected manuscripts at this stage are forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief for final notification to the authors.

2. Merit Evaluation (Peer Review) Manuscripts approved in the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent ad hoc reviewers, experts in the specific research field. Reviewers evaluate the work based on:

  • Originality and contribution to mathematical knowledge.

  • Argumentative consistency and theoretical coherence.

  • Methodological rigor and structural adequacy.

3. Editorial Decision Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the Executive Editors and the Editor-in-Chief will issue one of the following decisions:

  • Accepted for Publication: The manuscript is accepted without further changes.

  • Revisions Required: Authors must implement specific modifications. Revised manuscripts should be returned within the stipulated deadline, with changes highlighted. A second round of review may be required.

  • Rejected: The manuscript is not accepted for publication. A justified explanation based on the reviewers' reports will be provided.

4. Final Authority and Appeals The Editor-in-Chief holds the final authority over all editorial decisions. 

If an author disagrees with the editorial decision, a formal appeal may be submitted directly to the Editors. The appeal must be based on specific technical or scientific points. If the Editors find the request well-founded, the manuscript may be re-evaluated by the original reviewers or assigned to a new independent reviewer. The final decision after an appeal is definitive.