About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Archeomatica is a new multidisciplinary journal, published in Italy, dedicated to presenting and disseminating advanced methodologies, emerging technologies, and techniques for the study, documentation, safeguarding, conservation, and enhancement of cultural heritage.

The journal aims to publish significant and lasting contributions written by researchers, archaeologists, historians, conservators, and restorers involved in this field, in order to disseminate new specialized methodologies and experimental results. Archeomatica encourages constructive debate on the latest scientific applications, fostering the exchange of ideas and discoveries related to all aspects of the cultural heritage sector.

Archeomatica is also intended to be a primary source of multidisciplinary information and outreach for the cultural heritage sector.

The journal is divided into three sections: Documentation (Investigation and Documentation), Revelations (Analysis, Diagnostics, and Monitoring), and Restoration (Materials and Intervention Techniques). It is complemented by columns dedicated to specific topics, such as international information EU & World Heritage or the relationship between Art and Science.

Articles in English are welcome.

Peer Review Process

Articles submitted for review are directed to the three main sections: Documentation (Investigation and Documentation), Revelations (Analysis, Diagnostics, and Monitoring), Restoration (Materials and Intervention Techniques), and Guest Paper (scientific contributions in English). In the other sections, publication is at the discretion of the Editorial Board and may include reports or news from industry producers relevant to the sector.

Articles submitted for review are assigned to one or more editors based on the subject matter and the opinions expressed by the editors. Editors may register on the site in this role and indicate their areas of expertise.

The review process lasts up to a maximum of 3 months.

Editors send review requests to the reviewers. Reviewers respond to the editors indicating acceptance (or refusal) and then provide their assessment and suggestions on the manuscript. Editors record the reviewers’ acceptance (or refusal), as well as their decisions and recommendations, in the proposal’s page to track the editorial process.

To ensure a blind peer review of manuscripts submitted to this journal, all methods are used to keep the identities of authors and reviewers anonymous. To ensure a proper blind review, the following steps must be taken:

1. Authors must remove their names from the text of the file, using placeholder strings (in the bibliography and notes) instead of the author’s name, article title, etc.
2. In Microsoft Office documents, identifying information must be removed from the file properties (File menu in MS Word).
3. In PDF documents, authors’ names must also be removed from the document properties in the File menu of Adobe Acrobat.

Open Access Policy

Meaning of Open Access

In accordance with the main definitions of Open Access in scientific literature (i.e., the Budapest, Berlin, and Bethesda declarations), Archeomatica defines open access under the following conditions:

- articles are freely available without subscription or price barriers,
- contributions are released immediately in open access (without embargo periods),
- published material may be reused without requesting permission from the author, provided proper attribution to the original publication is given.

All articles published in Archeomatica—including data, graphics, and supplementary materials—may be linked from external sources, analyzed by search engines, reused by text-mining applications, websites, blogs, etc., free of charge, under the sole condition of proper citation of the source and the original publisher. Archeomatica believes that open access publishing promotes the exchange of research results among scientists from different disciplines, thus facilitating interdisciplinary research. The open access system also provides access to research results for researchers worldwide, including those from developing countries, and to any interested audience. Archeomatica uses the open model to disseminate its research findings as widely as possible within its field.

Advantages of Open Access for Authors

The high availability and visibility of our open access articles are ensured through free and unlimited online access. Anyone may access and download the full text of all articles published in Archeomatica. Unlike business models of large publishers, Archeomatica does not require subscription fees or pay-per-view charges to read its published articles. Subscription is optional and solely for those who wish to receive printed copies of the journal, due to production and shipping costs. Open access publications are also more likely to be included in search engines and indexing databases.

The higher citation impact of open access articles is due to their availability and broad dissemination. Open access publications are demonstrably cited more often.

At present, although Archeomatica applies a peer-review process to its primary articles, no publication fees are charged to authors. This is made possible thanks to contributions from sector-related companies that support the journal.

Ethical Code

Archeomatica adheres to the spirit and guidelines developed by the "Committee on Publication Ethics" (COPE) to ensure an ethical approach to journal publication. The entire Editorial Board has adopted COPE guidelines to take all possible measures against malpractice and to ensure good ethical standards in the publication process. Ethical practices are upheld by the editorial team, authors, and peer reviewers.

EDITORIAL TEAM OBLIGATIONS
The Editorial Board of Archeomatica is responsible for deciding which submitted articles may be published. The Board’s decisions are supported by reports from anonymous referees and may involve consultation with other team members. The Board is also guided by editorial policies and must comply with legal restrictions regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Board follows the double-blind reviewing protocol to ensure confidentiality during the review process. The Board guarantees that manuscripts are evaluated solely based on their intellectual content, regardless of authors’ social backgrounds, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origins, or political convictions. The Board strives to ensure that articles are published in open access and freely available to all interested readers.

AUTHORS’ OBLIGATIONS
Authors must guarantee that the submitted manuscript has not been previously published, is not under review elsewhere, and has been submitted with the approval of the relevant institution. Authors must ensure that their entire manuscript is original; if they have used others’ work or words, these must be properly cited. Proper acknowledgment of others’ work must always be ensured. Authors must cite publications that have significantly influenced the nature of the submitted work. Any manuscript failing to meet originality requirements will be immediately rejected.
Authorship must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All individuals who have contributed meaningfully should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors are appropriately included, have reviewed and approved the final manuscript version, and agree to publication. If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must cooperate with the editorial team to retract or correct the manuscript.
Authors will be required to accept the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License if their work is published in the journal.

REVIEWERS’ OBLIGATIONS
Each manuscript received for review must be treated confidentially. Manuscripts must not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor. A selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research or unable to review it in a timely manner should notify the editorial team and withdraw from the process. Reviews must be conducted objectively; personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers must express their views clearly and with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant work not cited by the authors. Any statement involving previously reported observations or arguments must be properly referenced. Reviewers should alert the editorial team to any similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and previously published works.
Privileged information obtained through peer review must remain confidential and must not be used for personal benefit. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions involved.

Sponsors

Topcon, Virtualgeo, 3DTarget, Microgeo, Codevintec, Profilcultura, Leica Geosystems, Testo, Teorema

Journal History

Archeomatica published its first issue in 2009, following the strong interest shown in two special issues of the journal GEOmedia dedicated to technologies for cultural heritage, entitled *Speciale Archeomatica*.