The Computer Life (CPL) of the Domingo Brothers, Inc. publishers, USA welcomes articles in different areas of computer science, information engineering and its application in human social life from all over the world. Contributions must be original and must not have been submitted for publication elsewhere. The manuscript should be submitted to CPL via email for peer reviewed. Make sure that your manuscript be not more than 20 pages of A4 size, one column, roughly equal to 3000-5000 words. These 20 pages should also cover the graphs and tables presented.
Manuscripts submitted to CPL are critically reviewed before they are published. The purpose of the review is to assure readers that the papers have been found acceptable by competent and independent professionals. The process often results in desirable changes to the manuscripts.
For non-English speaking authors it is highly recommended to put their manuscripts for English language editing before submission. Manuscripts with no enough English standards will be rejected before scientific evaluation.
Manuscripts prepared for CPL should be arranged in the following order: (1) Title and name(s) of author(s). (2) Author and paper documentation at bottom of the same page. (3) Abstract. (4) Keywords. (5) Introduction. To includes a literature review. (6) Materials and methods/methodology. (7) Results. This section is sometimes combined with the discussion. (8) Discussion. Sometimes a conclusion section is included in the paper, which may be combined with the discussion section. (9) Acknowledgement. (10) References.
Title and Name(s) Of Author(s)
The title should represent the article's content and facilitate retrieval in indices developed by secondary literature services. A good title (i) briefly identifies the subject, (ii) indicates the purpose of the study, and (iii) gives important and high-impact words early. A person usually decides to read an article based on its title. Besides being descriptive, titles should be short. It is recommended that titles not exceed 15 words, except in unusual circumstances. A title containing fewer than 6 words probably should be expanded.
The meaning and order of words in a title are also important. Do not start the title with low-impact words such as "effect of" or "influence of". Instead, concentrate on the subject and findings of the research. The title must be useful in itself as a label. The terms in the title should be limited to those words that give significant information about the article's content.
Many readers peruse the titles in a table of contents to decide whether or not to turn to a given abstract. The title must interest these readers. Highly specific, narrow titles with words understandable only to specialists will be passed over. Furthermore, literature searchers will ignore titles that are incomprehensible to all but a few individuals.
Titles should never contain abbreviations, chemical formulas, or proprietary names; and authors should avoid using unusual or outdated terminology. For economy of space, common names of chemical and crops should be used in titles. If a crop or microorganism has no common name, then the scientific name (genus and species) is used. A running title of 50 character and /or spaces should be provided.
A person reading the abstract should be able to tell quickly the value of the report and whether to read it further. In many cases, more people will read the abstract than will read the entire report. Thus, the abstract has the dual function of supplying information to those who will read the entire report and to those who will not read the entire paper.
The abstract should be a suitable literary adjunct to the printed paper. It should be written after the paper is completed and should be consistent with statements in the paper. To some extent, the abstract will repeat wording in the paper, but because it is sometimes read immediately before the introduction or other main sections, it should not be a tedious recapitulation. On the other hand, the abstract must be completely self-explanatory and intelligible in itself.
The abstract also should call attention to new items, observations and numerical data. Abstract should be informative. Expressions such as "is discussed" and "is described" should rarely be included. Specific rather than general statements must be used, especially in the methods and results sections of the abstract.
The abstract should not exceed 300 words for full-length papers and 100 words for notes, and is not divided into paragraphs. It should not include bibliographic, figure, or table references. Equations, formulas, obscure abbreviations and acronyms are also inappropriate. The scientific names of plants, insects, etc., full chemical names and identification of soil, if the soil type is a factor in interpreting the results, must be included in the abstract when the common names are first mentioned.
A list of three to five keywords from the manuscript must be supplied. Keywords should include the topic investigated and special techniques used. Keywords should be informative without reference to the main text.
The article should begin by clearly identifying its subject. The author should state the hypothesis or definition of the problem the research was designed to solve. A reader is given orientation to the research being reported by brief reference to previous concepts and research. References to literature should be limited to information that is essential to the reader's orientation. Most readers do not need long literature reviews, especially of old references, if newer ones are available, or to be convinced of the importance of the research. The purpose of the introduction is to supply sufficient background information to allow the reader to understand and evaluate the results of the present study without needing to refer to previous publications on the topic.
Introductions should be short and include: (1) A brief statement of the problem that justifies the work, or the hypothesis on which it is based. (2) The findings of others that will be challenged or developed. (3) An explanation of the general approaches and objectives. This part may indicate the means by which the question was examined, especially if the methods are new.
Materials and Methods
CPL will publish manuscripts which are based on experimental and survey data and theoretical analyses, provided that acceptable results are obtained. The purpose of this section is to give sufficient procedural details so that a competent scientist can repeat the experiments.
For materials, the authors should supply the appropriate technical specifications and quantities and source of method of preparation. If a commercially available product is used, the name and address of its manufacturer should be given parenthetically after it is first mentioned. If necessary, the pertinent chemical and physical properties of the reagents should be listed. Chemical rather than trade names are preferred. Any plants, animals, other organisms and soils not mentioned in the abstract should be identified accurately by genus, species, cultivar, soil classification and special characteristics.
Methods should be cited by a reference(s) if possible. If the techniques used are widely familiar, write only their names. If a method is modified, an outline of the modification should be given unless the modification is trivial. Give details of unusual experimental designs or statistical methods. Field works in agronomy and plant breeding should be based on, at least, two years data. This section may be arranged chronologically, by a succession of techniques, or in another manner. This section may include tables and figures.
A common fault in the results section is to repeat in prose what is already clear from a cursory examination of the graphics. If the tables and figures are well constructed, they will show both the results and the experimental design.
Tables, graphs and other illustrations in the results section should provide a clear understanding of representative data obtained from the experiments. Data include in illustrations and tables should not be extensively discussed in the text, but significant findings should be noted. When only a few determinations are presented, they should be treated descriptively in the text. Repetitive determinations should be presented in tables or graphs.
The objective of each experiment should be made clear in the text call attention to special features. Finally, the results should be related to one another. Frequently, this causes the results section to be combined with discussion section.
The discussion section interprets data presented in the results section, giving particular attention to the problem, or hypothesis, presented in the introduction. A good discussion will contain: (1) Principles, relationships and generalizations that can be supported by the results. (2) Exceptions, lack of correlation and definition of unsettled points, gap areas needing further investigation. (3) Emphasis on results and conclusions that agree or disagree with other work(s). (4) Practical as well as theoretical implications. (5) Conclusions, with summary of evidence for each one.
The discussion section, if not combined with the results section, should not recapitulate results, but should discuss their meaning. The reader should be told how the results provide a solution to the problem stated in the introduction or given as the objective of the work. The work should be connected with previous work, with an explanation of how and why it differs or agree. References should be limited to those that are most pertinent. Older references should be omitted if they have been superseded by more recent ones.
Speculation is encouraged, but should be reasonable, firmly founded in observation and subject to tests. Where results differ from previous results for unexplained reasons, possible explanations should not be laboured.
Controversial issues should be discussed clearly and fairly. A common fault of discussion section is a tendency towards too much contemplation of nonessentials. Only discussion that illuminates significant areas should be presented.
Some papers may warrant a separate conclusion section, while in other papers it is desirable to present conclusions as part of the discussion section. The latter would be a paper of average complexity where conclusions are few. Whether this section is combined or separate, the author should include any significant conclusions that have been drawn from the work. These conclusions should be carefully worded so the readers can identify and understand them.
In this section, the author(s) may wish to thank some research institutions, companies, or governmental bodies or people who have contributed or financially supported the research from which the manuscript is derived.
The reference section lists the literature cited in the paper. Authors are encouraged to cite only published, significant and up-to-date references in their papers. This section is discussed later in more detail.