JSDIO promotes transparency and reproducibility in optimization, decision science, analytics, and sustainability research. In line with COPE Core Practice #5, this policy sets out requirements and recommendations for: data availability, reporting guidelines, and registration of clinical trials and other applicable study designs. COPE clarifies that journals are not required to host or review data, but must develop transparent, consistently applied policies on data availability.

We adopt a tiered, standards based approach informed by the Research Data Alliance (RDA) framework for journal data policies, which defines common features such as data availability statements, repository use, data citation, and optional peer review of data.

Definitions

• Research data: Essential evidence that supports the conclusions of a research study. This data may take various forms—digital, physical, or printed—and includes both quantitative and qualitative information gathered through methods such as experimentation, observation, modeling, interviews, or derived from existing sources.
• Materials: Protocols, experimental designs, questionnaires, and other study materials.
• Code/software: Source code, scripts, notebooks, workflows, container/Docker images, and environment files enabling computational reproducibility.
• Repository: A trusted platform for long-term data preservation and access, ideally issuing persistent identifiers (e.g., DOI).
• Clinical trial: Any research project that prospectively assigns people or groups to an intervention to study effects on health-related outcomes (per ICMJE). Find out about clinical trials for more details.

A. Data Availability and Sharing

A.1 Data Availability Statement (mandatory)

All submissions must include a Data Availability Statement (DAS) describing where the data and code (where applicable) supporting the results can be accessed, under what conditions, and with persistent identifiers (e.g., DOIs) when available. This aligns with leading publisher practices requiring DAS in original research.

Examples are provided below, and authors should use or adapt the following statements in the manuscript, as applicable:

1. Open data with DOI
   "The data supporting this study are openly available in [Repository] at [DOI], under the [license]."
2. Open data (no DOI)
   "The data supporting this study are openly available in [Repository] at [URL], reference [accession/reference]."
3. Derived from public sources
   "The data supporting this study are available in [Repository] at [DOI/URL]. These data were derived from public resources: [list with URLs/DOIs]."
4. Data within article/supplement
   "All data supporting this study are included in the article and/or its Supplementary Materials."
5. Data available on request (privacy/ethics)
   "Due to [privacy/ethical] restrictions, the data are not publicly available. De-identified data may be available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and with [institutional/committee] approval."
6. Third party licensed data
   "Data were obtained from [third party] under license and are not publicly available. Access may be requested from [third party] at [URL] with permission."
7. Embargoed data
   "Data will be available in [Repository] at [DOI/URL] after an embargo ending on [date] to support commercialization/further analyses."
8. No new data
   "No new data were created or analyzed in this study."

Authors must include a Data Availability Statement (DAS) in their manuscript, placed immediately before the “References” section. This ensures that readers can easily locate information about the accessibility of the data supporting the research findings.

A.2 What to Share

Depending on study type, authors should make available as applicable:

• Benchmark/problem instances (original or curated), objective function definitions, constraints, instance generators.
• Simulation inputs/outputs, random seeds, event logs, configuration files, and solver settings (versions, parameters).
• Algorithmic artifacts: source code, pseudocode with full parameterization, notebooks, workflows, and environment manifests (e.g., requirements.txt, environment.yml, or a container recipe). Sharing code with versioned, citable artifacts is essential to computational reproducibility.

A.3 Where to Share (repositories)

JSDIO prefers deposition in discipline-specific repositories when available; otherwise use reputable general purpose repositories that provide PIDs (e.g., DOI), versioning, and clear licensing. Authors may identify suitable repositories via global registries such as re3data (Registry of Research Data Repositories) and FAIRsharing (interlinked registry of data policies, standards, and repositories).

Note: Uploading data solely as journal supplementary files is discouraged where robust repositories are available; the RDA framework favors repositories for discoverability and preservation.

A.4 Sensitive, restricted, or third party data

If data cannot be openly shared (e.g., legal, ethical, commercial, or third party licensing constraints), the DAS must explain the restriction and provide conditions for controlled access if feasible (e.g., via a data use agreement), consistent with established DAS templates.

A.5 No new data

If the work generates no new data (e.g., theoretical proofs, conceptual frameworks), the DAS should state this explicitly using the template in Data Availability Statement (DAS) above.

A.6 Embargoes

Reasonable embargoes (typically ≤12 months) may be requested to enable follow up analyses or commercialization; the DAS must specify embargo duration and the repository where data will be released. The use of embargoes is recognized in standard data policy features.

A.7 Data and Code Citation

All public datasets and code that underpin the findings must be cited in the reference list with persistent identifiers (e.g., DOI) using standard dataset citation formats. Major publishers' policies and the RDA framework emphasize formal citation to improve transparency and credit.

A.8 Code & Computational Reproducibility

Where computational analysis is central, authors should provide:

• Source code under an explicit license, archived with a DOI (e.g., GitHub + Zenodo integration), and versioned to match the manuscript.
• Environment details sufficient for re execution (e.g., package versions, OS, container).
• Execution instructions and, if needed, a minimal replication package (test data, scripts, expected outputs).

Editorial evidence shows code availability at submission meaningfully supports computational reproducibility.

B. Reporting Guidelines

B.1 General expectation

Manuscripts must report methods and results with sufficient detail for replication. For study designs covered by recognized reporting standards, authors should complete and submit the relevant checklist(s) (as Supplementary Material) and follow the associated guidance.

B.2 Recommended guidelines by study type

• Implementation/operational research in real organizations or systems: follow EQUATOR's "Reporting guidelines for implementation/operational research" (e.g., study context, intervention, fidelity, data quality, outcomes, limitations, generalizability).
• Randomized controlled trials (if applicable): CONSORT. Systematic reviews:  PRISMA. Observational studies: STROBE. Qualitative research: COREQ. These EQUATOR-endorsed standards are widely adopted to improve clarity and reproducibility.
• Computational/simulation/optimization studies: fully specify algorithms, solvers, parameter settings, stopping criteria, instance selection, random seeds, and hardware; pair with Code & Computational Reproducibility requirements in Section A.8. Empirical work in computational fields benefits from sharing code at submission.

C. Registration of Clinical Trials and Similar Studies

While JSDIO's typical submissions are in engineering and decision sciences, any manuscript reporting a clinical trial or similar health related intervention study must:

• Be registered in a public registry (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP) at or before first participant enrolment and include the registration identifier in the manuscript.
• Follow applicable reporting guidelines (e.g., CONSORT).
• Where legally applicable, comply with results reporting requirements (e.g., FDAAA 801 in the U.S.)—ClinicalTrials.gov provides authoritative guidance and timelines.

D. Editorial and Peer Review Procedures

• Submission requirements: Manuscripts lacking a DAS will be returned for correction before peer review. Where a checklist (Section B) applies, editors may request it at submission or revision.
• Data/code access during review: Editors or reviewers may request controlled, anonymous access to data and code (e.g., via private repository links) to assess reproducibility claims. Journals are not required to host or routinely review raw data; they must, however, apply transparent and consistent policies.
• Policy tiers and flexibility: JSDIO reserves the right to apply discipline appropriate stringency (e.g., encouraging vs. requiring open data) consistent with the RDA's tiered policy framework and community norms.

E. Ethics, Legal, and Privacy Considerations

Authors are responsible for ensuring compliance with ethical approvals, participant consent, institutional policies, and legal restrictions (e.g., privacy, IP, contracts). Where data cannot be open, authors should share metadata, analysis code, and synthetic or anonymized datasets where feasible, and clearly describe access conditions in the DAS using recognized templates. Find out about informed consent for more details.

F. Compliance and Remedies

• Minor non compliance (e.g., incomplete DAS): editorial hold until corrected.
• Material non compliance (e.g., refusal to share data without valid reason; unregistered clinical trial purporting to be eligible): rejection or revocation of acceptance; if post publication, correction, expression of concern, or retraction may be considered according to COPE guidance.

This policy will be reviewed annually to reflect evolving community standards (e.g., updates from COPE, RDA, EQUATOR).