Announcements

MDPI will be attending the 5th International Conference on Optoelectronic Information and Computer Engineering (OICE2026), which will be held in Harbin, China, from 15 to 17 May 2026.

In recent years, optoelectronic information and computer engineering technologies have been widely used in all walks of life in national economy and national defense construction, driving the development of modern information technology with its extremely fast response speed, exceedingly wide bandwidth, great information capacity, and incredibly high information efficiency and resolution. Based on electronic science and technology, computer science and technology, information and communication engineering, OICE aims to provide an international communication platform for scholars, scientists, engineers, and students in related fields to share the latest research results, discuss the existing problems and challenges, and explore the future trends.

As an annual academic conference, OICE has been successfully held over the last 4 years, attracting delegates from more than 10 countries and regions, including China, the United Kingdom, Russia, and Canada. The published proceedings have been included in SPIE Digital Library, EI Compendex, and Scopus.

The following MDPI journals will be represented at the conference:

• Sensors;
• Lights;
• Computers;
• Photonics;
• Information;
• Optics;
• Signals;
• Fibers.

We invite you to visit MDPI’s booth to meet our representatives, explore our latest initiatives, and discuss potential collaborations. For more details about the conference, please visit the official website: https://www.icoice.org/Default.aspx.

We look forward to connecting with you in Harbin!

1. Could you briefly introduce yourself and tell us about your field of research?

I am a Postdoctoral Fellow at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. My research focuses on measurement and geodesy, particularly ionosphere, high-precision GNSS processing and PNT applications. Since measurement and error handling are at the core of my work, it is closely related to the journal Sensors. Many kinds of sensors can provide raw data, and my research emphasizes how to process these measurements accurately, especially under challenging conditions such as space weather disturbances. A major part of my work examines the impact of ionospheric activity on GNSS, including modeling and scintillation mitigation, which directly connects sensor data to practical positioning and navigation outcomes.

2. What key aspects do you typically focus on during the review process?

I mainly look at the originality of the work and whether the content is substantial. Specifically, I follow a structured approach.

First, I quickly read the abstract and conclusion to understand the field and the core problem. Then, I examine the introduction, methods, and results in detail. For the introduction, I check if it clearly contrasts with the most advanced existing methods to frame the problem. A good introduction should explain not just what the authors are doing, but why it is needed. It should outline what other scholars have done, identify the specific challenges, and show how this work addresses those challenges in a targeted way. This reflects a deep understanding of the scientific question.

For the methods and results, I assess if they are correct and thorough enough to support the conclusions. Some manuscripts have insufficient work or unclear figures, making it hard for readers to judge the findings. Results should directly and specifically address the problem or challenge stated in the introduction and conclusion, showing how it is solved, not just mentioned generally. These aspects are key for peers, both close and broad, to recognize the work's value and innovation.

3. Based on your reviewing experience, what are some common problems that authors face?

The most frequent issue is writing quality. On a deeper level, this often reflects a lack of scientific logic or maturity. One common problem is that many manuscripts read like lab reports rather than research papers. A lab report simply states what was done, but a scientific paper requires real thinking, a grasp of the academic frontier, and a deep analysis of results, especially new findings.

Another issue is with wording and writing itself. Many submissions use terms that are too grand and vague. Academic writing should be clear and specific, explaining exactly what was done and outlining the contribution without exaggeration. Many authors struggle to grasp these two points conceptually. Even when they receive reviewer comments on them, they often cannot revise the paper effectively. This highlights a fundamental difference in mindset between technical engineers and scientists.

4. For young scholars who are just beginning to participate in peer review, what specific advice would you offer?

My advice is to be strict and uphold scientific standards. If a paper does not meet the level for publication, it should be revised and improved according to academic norms, not be accepted with lower standards. I find my reviews are often more stringent and detailed than some other reviewers'. Some manuscripts have flaws in content or method but try to avoid mentioning them in the abstract and conclusion to get by, while being well-packaged in form. These require even more careful scrutiny. Furthermore, for journals like Sensors that cover a broad scope, the reviewer may not be a specialist in that exact niche. For a general peer reviewer, this kind of thorough examination is even more important.

5. How has serving as a reviewer shaped your perspective on manuscript quality and improved your own writing or research practices?

Serving as a reviewer has greatly broadened my perspective. Reading many manuscripts, some excellent and some less so, has helped me understand where my own writing stands. It allows me to learn from truly skilled scientists in how to structure and articulate research. Being exposed to high-quality work is particularly beneficial. Sometimes, a truly good paper has real taste; its logic is so smooth that you can read it in one sitting, and the experience is immediately positive. This inspires me in my own research. It has also been crucial for improving my scientific taste.

6. How do you see the role of reviewers evolving with advancements in artificial intelligence and automated tools in research publishing?

The rise and application of AI is a major, unavoidable trend. However, it cannot currently replace a scholar's judgment in evaluating research. Last year, I participated in an evaluation of large language models by Shanghai AI Lab. The conclusion was that without being fed specific literature, current language models, when used for answering professional questions or doing research, perform at most at an undergraduate level. Therefore, maintaining scholarly judgment and taste is essential. In terms of efficiency, however, AI is very capable in areas like language polishing. This can make communication between reviewers, authors, and readers smoother, reducing misunderstandings caused by unclear English expression.

We are honored to announce that Prof. Dr. William Gerwick will serve as the Chair of the 2026 Tu Youyou Award Committee.

A world-renowned authority in marine natural products chemistry and pharmacology, Professor Gerwick is a Distinguished Professor at both the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences at the University of California San Diego (UCSD). His pioneering work at the intersection of ocean sciences and drug discovery makes him a fitting leader for an award centered on transformative medicinal breakthroughs.

Under Professor Gerwick’s stewardship, the 2026 Tu Youyou Award Committee will focus on recognizing innovative and impactful research in natural products chemistry and medicinal chemistry, particularly work with the potential to drive meaningful advances in both scientific understanding and human health.

To provide further insight into his perspectives, we include below an interview with Professor Gerwick, in which he reflects on his scientific journey, his views on the field, and his vision for the Tu Youyou Award.

A Conversation with the Chair

1. Could you please introduce yourself and your research journey?

My research focuses on the natural products of marine algae and cyanobacteria, their application in medicine, their biosynthesis using genomic approaches, and innovative methods in the structure elucidation of natural products.

I received my BS degree from the University of California at Davis, my PhD from the University of California at San Diego, and conducted postdoctoral work at the University of Connecticut. After a couple of years in a junior faculty position at the Department of Chemistry at the University of Puerto Rico, I spent 21 years as Professor of Pharmacy at Oregon State University. In 2005, I returned to my PhD institution at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences at UC San Diego, where I am currently a Distinguished Professor of Oceanography and Pharmaceutical Sciences.

Throughout my career, I have been dedicated to advancing the field through both leadership and mentorship. I have served as president of the American Society of Pharmacognosy, chaired and co-chaired several major research conferences, and served as an associate editor for the Journal of Natural Products. I am a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and of the American Society of Pharmacognosy. I have trained over 100 doctoral and postdoctoral students, and my research group has published nearly 500 papers and more than 25 patents on topics in the natural product sciences and medicinal chemistry.

2. What motivated you to accept the role of Chair of the 2026 Tu Youyou Award Committee?

Of course, I am a huge supporter of all awards that are given in recognition of excellent scientific research, and especially so in the natural products sciences and medicinal chemistry. However, this award is truly special in that it recognizes scientific excellence as well as impact, and is given in the name of an individual, Tu Youyou, who clearly had many challenges along the path to reach the pinnacle of her success. Not only was she the first Chinese person to win a Nobel prize in this area, but she was also the first Chinese woman to receive a Nobel prize, and this was achieved without graduate education in China or elsewhere. It’s a true testament to what can be achieved by hard work, determination, and vision. To read the history of her extraordinary approach to discovering novel antimalarial compounds from Traditional Chinese Medicine is truly inspirational. It is, therefore, the inspiration provided by the extraordinary life and career of Tu Youyou that motivated me to accept the Chair of the Award Committee for 2026.

3. How do you view the role of natural products chemistry and medicinal chemistry in today’s scientific landscape, and what major advances over the past decade have shaped this field?

A quite remarkable integration of fields is currently transforming natural products science and medicinal chemistry. In natural products, we are seeing integration of different omics methods, from metabolites to proteins to nucleic acids. Sophisticated biological and pharmacological approaches are driving the discovery of exquisitely potent and selective natural products. Advances are being made to integrate molecular-level recognition of natural products with chemical ecological studies, and sophisticated methods of structure determination using Artificial Intelligence or pioneering new tools such as microED are being applied with increasing frequency. High-level synthetic methodologies, such as protecting group-free synthetic routes, are enhancing medicinal chemistry, accelerating the identification of lead molecules with attractive pharmaceutical properties at an increasing pace.

4. How do you consider the balance between fundamental discovery (e.g., new molecules or mechanisms) and practical impact (e.g., therapeutic applications)?

Many individuals are excellent scientists and mentors, and have essential roles in developing our culture that values science and the scientific method. It should also be pointed out that not all scientific discoveries are going to have a broad societal impact, but they are nevertheless critical to the overall body and structure of science. But it is a truly remarkable individual who makes a key scientific discovery, recognizes its potential value to society in general, and then has the skills and determination to bring it forward as a useful product. That was the type of person the Tu Youyou is, and that is the type of person who is honored by the prize in her name.

5. What do you see as the key challenges or opportunities currently facing the field?

We are on the crux of an amazing revolution in many of the sciences, including natural products and medicinal chemistry; the purposeful application of Artificial Intelligence to solving many of the difficulties involved in the search for new pharmaceuticals from Nature. AI is transforming how we select organisms for study, what pharmaceutical targets to go after, rapidly resolving the chemical structures of new compounds, identifying efficient routes to their chemical synthesis, understanding their molecular mechanisms of action, and finally, designing their clinical application. The role of people in these pursuits is changing. Increasingly, the human role will be providing overall vision: what can we do? What should we do? And it is important to remember that AI is providing hypotheses, not truth. Scientists with expert domain knowledge will be critical for discerning the correctness of hypotheses put forth by AI. Altogether, advances in technology, expanding knowledge, and the appropriate use of AI methods are preparing society to be able to address emerging diseases, such as pandemics, as well as conditions that are not effectively treated by currently existing therapeutics.

6. How do you expect the Tu Youyou Award to contribute to the advancement of natural product chemistry, medicinal chemistry, and human health over the coming years?

The Tu Youyou Award is potentially transformative for the broad fields of natural products science and medicinal chemistry as it brings a significantly increased level of visibility to these topics and their contributions to human health. It will be crucial to have excellent communication to news agencies, social media and other communication outlets so that the general public is informed and educated on the high impact of these natural product/medicinal chemistry contributions. This will bring increased funding, attract promising students, and generally enrich the interface of these fields with the health sector.

7. What message would you like to convey to the research community and the public during this open nomination phase?

This prize gives broad societal visibility to the role that natural products have had in shaping a majority of our current medicines, as well as understanding the life forms with whom we share the planet. Further, it recognizes a woman scientist working under sub-optimal conditions who could persevere and make discoveries of global impact. The prize and what it represents, therefore, inspires current and future generations to engage in the study of Nature and its relationship to Human Health, to overcome adversity, and to aspire to making one’s life impactful.

About the Tu Youyou Award

Established in 2016, the Tu Youyou Award seeks to honor those who excel in the fields of natural products chemistry and medicinal chemistry. This award offers a total prize of CHF 100,000, which will be equally divided among the winners if there is more than one, with each recipient receiving an award medal and a certificate.

The 2026 Tu Youyou Award is open for nominations until 31 October 2026. We encourage all eligible candidates to participate in this prestigious recognition, as this award not only honors individual achievement but also encourages further scientific exchange, exploration and discovery in critical areas of medicine.

If you are interested in participating, please visit the Tu Youyou Award website for more information on the nomination requirements.

MDPI is pleased to announce our participation in the World Congress on Condition Monitoring (WCCM 2026), held from 25 to 27 August in Milan, Italy.

WCCM 2026 stands as a premier worldwide platform for scientists and professionals from both academia and industry to share knowledge and insights in the field of condition monitoring. The congress is dedicated to facilitating the global exchange of research and applications, with a strong emphasis on international cooperation and technological advancements.

The conference covers a wide spectrum of key areas, including condition monitoring technologies, sensors and data acquisition, signal processing and machine learning, fault diagnosis and prognostics, and maintenance and reliability. Attendees will also have the opportunity to explore industrial applications, standards, and transformative case studies that are shaping the future of asset management.

The following open access journals will be represented:

• Sensors;
• Machines;
• NDT;
• ASI;
• Applied Mechanics;
• Vibration;
• JETA;
• Lubricants;
• Technologies;
• Standards;
• Logistics.

Our portfolio of journals available for publishing up-to-date research in immediate open access format has been further expanded. In the first quarter of 2026, nine new journals released their inaugural issues and three transferred journals released their first issue as part of MDPI, covering the subjects of clinical medicine, chemistry, computer science & mathematics, engineering, environment & ecology, and social sciences & psychology.

We extend our gratitude to the Editors-in-Chief, Associate Editors, and Editorial Board Members who will shape the future course of these brand-new journals. Each journal is dedicated to upholding strong editorial standards through a thorough peer review process, ensuring impactful open access scholarship.

Please feel free to browse and discover more about the new journals below.

We would like to thank everyone who has supported the development of open access publishing. If you would like to create a new journal, you are welcome to send an application here or contact the New Journal Committee (newjournal-committee@mdpi.com).

1. Congratulations on winning the Sensors Outstanding Special Issue Award! Could you tell us about your current research interests? What initially inspired or motivated you to embark on this particular field of study?

Thank you very much to Sensors for this recognition. This award is shared with my colleagues, Prof. Dr. Constanza Rubio and Dr. Daniel Tarrazó‑Serrano, with whom I work on research focused on the advanced control of acoustic wave propagation. Together, we design and develop structured materials and devices that precisely manipulate the sound field. Our approach combines numerical modeling, additive manufacturing, experimental validation, and acoustic characterization to create compact, efficient, and adaptable solutions for wave‑control applications.

My interest in this field began with a fascination for the possibility of controlling and manipulating acoustic waves using engineered structures specifically designed to alter their propagation with high precision. The convergence of fundamental physics, materials engineering, and experimental design motivated me to explore metastructures, resonators, and advanced sensing systems as powerful tools for shaping acoustic behavior. Over time, this combination of disciplines has revealed a wide range of opportunities for innovation in acoustic wave control, a field that continues to evolve and inspire new research directions.

2. How do you view the role of Special Issues in today’s academic communication landscape? In your opinion, what are the main differences between contributing to a Special Issue and submitting to a regular journal issue?

Special Issues play an important role in academic communication by bringing together recent, thematically coherent contributions around a specific topic, helping readers identify emerging advances and trends more easily. They also provide greater visibility and dissemination for the research included. However, their increasing number requires strong editorial rigor and robust quality control to avoid thematic fragmentation and ensure that they truly contribute to scientific progress.

The main difference is that a Special Issue demands strict alignment with a clearly defined topic and follows a specific timeline, typically managed by Guest Editors. In contrast, regular issues accept a broader range of submissions within the journal’s scope and follow the standard editorial process. While Special Issues often offer heightened thematic visibility, they also require a closer fit with their focus.

3. The Special Issue you edited, “Acoustic and Ultrasonic Sensing Technology in Non-Destructive Testing”, has proven to be a great success. Could you share your experience of serving as a Guest Editor? What aspects of the editorial process did you find most valuable?

My experience as a Guest Editor has been particularly enriching. First, I would highlight the opportunity to engage directly with cutting‑edge research, which provides a privileged view of emerging trends in the field. Equally valuable is the constructive dialog with authors and reviewers, which helps ensure scientific quality and significantly improves the submitted manuscripts. Finally, the editorial process offers a deeper appreciation of collaborative work, methodological rigor, and the academic responsibility required to coordinate a high‑level Special Issue.

4. From a Guest Editor's perspective, what qualities do you value most when reviewing submissions? What specific advice would you offer to researchers considering contributing to a Special Issue?

From a Guest Editor’s perspective, the qualities I value most when reviewing submissions include strict alignment with the theme of the Special Issue, clarity and methodological soundness, and the originality of the contribution. Equally essential are coherence in the presentation, rigor in interpreting the results, and full adherence to the journal’s guidelines.

My advice to researchers considering submitting to a Special Issue is to read the thematic scope carefully, ensure their work provides a genuine and meaningful advancement related to the proposed focus, and prepare a methodologically sound and well-contextualized manuscript. It is also important to follow the author’s instructions rigorously, respect the Special Issue's specific deadlines, and explicitly highlight the study's relevance to the monographic theme.

5. In light of current trends in academic publishing, how do you perceive the role of open access journals, such as Sensors, in facilitating scholarly communication?

Open access journals, such as Sensors, play an essential role in scholarly communication by facilitating the immediate and unrestricted dissemination of scientific results. This model increases the visibility, citation, and real impact of research outputs while promoting greater equity in access to knowledge. In a context where scientific progress advances rapidly, open access accelerates the transfer of research findings, fosters interdisciplinary collaboration, and ensures that scientific work remains accessible to researchers, professionals, and organizations without institutional subscriptions.

6. What key advice would you like to share with early-career researchers who are just beginning their journey and aspire to make a meaningful impact in their respective fields?

I would recommend focusing on three fundamental aspects. First, it is essential to develop a solid methodological foundation and maintain a critical and rigorous attitude toward one’s own work. Second, building a coherent research trajectory is key, identifying relevant questions and contributions that provide real added value within the field. Finally, I would encourage active participation in the scientific community through collaborations, conference attendance, and publishing in high‑quality venues, as these activities greatly strengthen long‑term visibility and impact.

1. Congratulations on winning the Sensors Outstanding Special Issue Award! Can you tell us about your current research interests? What motivated you to pursue this area of study?
My current research interests focus on magnetic sensors, instrumentation, and precision measurement systems for particle accelerator environments. In particular, I am interested in how advanced sensing technologies can improve beam diagnostics, stability, and overall accelerator performance. My motivation for pursuing this field stems from a strong interest in applied physics and engineering, especially in large-scale scientific infrastructures such as those used in high-energy physics. The challenge of designing robust, high-precision instruments for extreme conditions continues to drive my research.

2. Attending international conferences is an essential part of scientific collaboration and growth. How do you plan to promote the journal at the conference? What is the significance of attending such conferences to expanding your international cooperation or enhancing your academic influence?
International conferences are vital platforms for exchanging ideas, forming collaborations, and staying at the forefront of technological developments. At such events, I aim to promote the journal by actively engaging with fellow researchers, discussing published work, and highlighting the quality and relevance of the journal’s Special Issues. Attending these conferences also strengthens international cooperation by facilitating direct interaction with experts from diverse fields. This not only broadens academic perspectives but also opens opportunities for collaborative research projects, ultimately enhancing both individual and institutional scientific impact.

3. Do you have any advice for aspiring young researchers looking to make a meaningful impact in their respective fields?
My advice to aspiring researchers is to remain curious, persistent, and open to interdisciplinary collaboration. Focus on building a strong foundation in your field, but do not hesitate to explore adjacent areas where innovation often occurs. Equally important is developing practical skills and engaging with real-world problems. Seek opportunities to collaborate internationally and participate in conferences, as these experiences are invaluable for both personal and professional growth.

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the visibility of these awards?
To improve the visibility of such awards, I believe there should be increased promotion through academic networks, social media platforms, and institutional channels. Highlighting awardees’ work through interviews, webinars, and featured articles can also help showcase the impact of the research to a broader audience. Additionally, collaboration with universities and research institutions can further amplify recognition and encourage wider participation.

5. What is your opinion on open access publishing, and how do you think it benefits the scientific community?
Open access publishing plays a crucial role in advancing science by making research freely available to the global community. It removes barriers to knowledge dissemination, allowing researchers, industry professionals, and students worldwide to benefit from the latest findings. This accessibility fosters collaboration, accelerates innovation, and ensures that publicly funded research can reach the widest possible audience, ultimately strengthening the scientific ecosystem.

6. As the winner of this award, would you like to take a moment to share your thoughts with the readers or express gratitude towards those who have played a significant role in your research accomplishments?
I am deeply honored to receive this award and grateful for the recognition of our work. I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my colleagues, collaborators, and mentors who have contributed to this achievement. Their support and expertise have been invaluable throughout my research journey. I also thank the editorial team and reviewers for their dedication to maintaining high scientific standards. This award serves as both recognition and motivation to continue contributing to advancements in the field.

1. Could you briefly introduce yourself and tell us about your field of research?

Hello! I am Jimin, a postdoctoral researcher in Mechanical Engineering at Georgia Tech. My work focuses on developing soft, wearable sensors and bioelectronic systems for healthcare and beyond—essentially building devices that can seamlessly interface with the human body while capturing meaningful physiological signals.

2. What key aspects do you typically focus on during the review process?

I usually start with the abstract to identify the core novelty—whether the work truly advances the field or simply extends existing approaches. Then, as I go through the manuscript, I often cross-check cited references. This helps verify the positioning of the work, and occasionally, I discover interesting ideas that inspire my own research as well.

3. Based on your reviewing experience, what are some common problems that authors face?

Not universally, but one noticeable trend is the increasing use of AI-generated figures or content. Sometimes this leads to inconsistencies—from minor typos to significant mismatches between figures and text, or missing disclosures about AI usage. These issues can undermine otherwise solid work if not carefully checked.

4. For young scholars who are just beginning to participate in peer review, what specific advice would you offer?

First, be cautious when you notice the authors using AI tools—especially for references. I have seen cases where non-existent citations were included, which is avoidable with a simple double-check. Tools can assist, but they should not replace verification.

Second, early in my career, I felt that accepting many review invitations—even outside my expertise—would strengthen my profile. In reality, this often leads to lower-quality reviews. It is important to recognize that each manuscript represents significant effort from the authors, and our comments should respect that by being thoughtful, specific, and constructive.

Finally, while AI can generate review comments, they often end up being vague and not particularly helpful. A good review should provide clarity and direction—not just general statements.

5. How has serving as a reviewer shaped your perspective on manuscript quality and improved your own writing or research practices?

As an early-career reviewer, I am still learning how to calibrate the tone and depth of my critiques across journals and impact factors. At times, I may have been overly strict—perhaps contributing to longer revision cycles than intended.

That said, reviewing has made me approach research with a more critical mindset. It has also helped me stay up to date with emerging trends, especially through introductions of recently published work. This has been surprisingly valuable when shaping new research ideas.

6. How do you see the role of reviewers evolving with advancements in artificial intelligence and automated tools in research publishing?

At present, AI tools are helpful for tasks like checking reference integrity or identifying overlaps, but they still fall short of capturing the nuanced, critical insights that human reviewers provide.

That said, the pace of AI development is remarkable. While these tools will undoubtedly become more powerful, it is important to remember that they are just that—tools. The responsibility for critical thinking remains with us.

In a way, a good reviewer should be like a skilled practitioner who does not rely solely on their tools, but also on their own judgment. AI can assist, but it should never replace independent evaluation.

International Day of Human Space Flight, observed annually on 12 April, commemorates the beginning of the space era for humankind.

On this day, in 1961, Yuri Gagarin became the first human to travel into space aboard the Vostok 1 spacecraft. This achievement marked a turning point in human history, opening the door to space exploration for the progress of humanity. The United Nations General Assembly officially declared this day in 2011 to honor the shared interest of humankind in exploring and using outer space for peaceful purposes.

In support of the International Day of Human Space Flight, MDPI journals aim to foster dialog and research on the scientific and engineering dimensions of space exploration. Through Special Issues and research articles, MDPI hopes to provide a platform to explore topics such as aerospace systems and innovations in spacecraft engineering technology.

“Astronaut Selection: Implications for the New Era of Spaceflight”
by Simon Evetts, Beth Healey, Tessa Morris-Paterson and Vladimir Pletser
Astronautics 2026, 1(1), 7; https://doi.org/10.3390/astronautics1010007  

“Optimal Control and Neural Porkchop Analysis for Low-Thrust Asteroid Rendezvous Mission”
by Zhong Zhang, Niccolò Michelotti, Gonçalo Oliveira Pinho, Yilin Zou and Francesco Topputo
Astronautics 2026, 1(1), 6; https://doi.org/10.3390/astronautics1010006

“Conditioned Sequence Models for Warm-Starting Sequential Convex Trajectory Optimization in Space Robots”
by Matteo D’Ambrosio, Stefano Silvestrini and Michèle Lavagna
Aerospace 2026, 13(2), 137; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace13020137  

“A Systematic Literature Review on PHM Strategies for (Hydraulic) Primary Flight Control Actuation Systems”
by Leonardo Baldo, Andrea De Martin, Giovanni Jacazio and Massimo Sorli
Actuators 2025, 14(8), 382; https://doi.org/10.3390/act14080382  

“Does the Choice of Topic Modeling Technique Impact the Interpretation of Aviation Incident Reports? A Methodological Assessment”
by Aziida Nanyonga, Keith Joiner, Ugur Turhan and Graham Wild
Technologies 2025, 13(5), 209; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies13050209  

“Neural Network-Aided Optical Navigation for Precise Lunar Descent Operations”
by Simone Andolfo, Antonio Genova, Fabio Valerio Buonomo, Anna Maria Gargiulo, Mohamed El Awag, Pierluigi Federici, Riccardo Teodori, Riccardo La Grassa, Cristina Re and Gabriele Cremonese
Aerospace 2025, 12(3), 195; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace12030195

“Assessment of Noise of MEMS IMU Sensors of Different Grades for GNSS/IMU Navigation”
by Vladimir Suvorkin, Miquel Garcia-Fernandez, Guillermo González-Casado, Mowen Li and Adria Rovira-Garcia
Sensors 2024, 24(6), 1953; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24061953

“The Impact of Smart Structures in Contemporary and Future Aerospace Scenarios” Guest Editors: Dr. Matteo Davide Lorenzo Dalla Vedova, Dr. Carlo Giovanni Ferro and Dr. Stefano Valvano Submission deadline: 30 June 2026	“Detector Systems for Space and Astronomy Applications” Guest Editors: Dr. Jasmina Lazendic-Galloway and Prof. Dr. Mark J. Bentum Submission deadline: 31 August 2026
“Aviation Science and Technology Applications” Guest Editor: Dr. Graham Wild Submission deadline: 31 August 2026	“Advanced and Intelligent Attitude Control for Spacecraft” Guest Editor: Dr. Fabio Celani Submission deadline: 30 September 2026
“Sensors and Sensing Technologies for Structural Health Monitoring in Civil, Mechanical, and Aerospace Engineering” Guest Editors: Dr. Francesco Nicassio, Prof. Dr. Gennaro Scarselli and Dr. Anastasios C. Mpalaskas Submission deadline: 31 October 2026	“Advances in Lunar Exploration (2nd Edition)” Guest Editors: Dr. Marco Sabatini and Dr. Leonard Felicetti Submission deadline: 31 December 2026

1. Could you briefly introduce yourself and tell us about your field of research?
   I began my passion for research while writing my thesis for a degree in electronic engineering at the Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria. In March 2015, I obtained my PhD in biomedical and computer engineering at the Magna Græcia University of Catanzaro. In April 2019, still not fully satisfied with research, I obtained my second doctorate in civil, environmental, and safety engineering at the Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria. Currently, I’m continuing my research at the Department of Health Sciences at the “Magna Graecia” University of Catanzaro, Italy. My research interests include the study of digital electronics, embedded systems, thermal and ultrasonic sensors, and thermographic analysis on biomedical and industrial applications and devices.
2. What key aspects do you typically focus on during the review process?
   My priorities concern the scientific robustness and methodological rigor of the study; the level of novelty compared to the state of the art; the coherence between objectives, methods, results, and conclusions; and the reproducibility and transparency of the proposed approach. In the field of biomedical engineering, I focus on validation protocols, robustness, and the practical relevance of the presented solutions.
3. Based on your reviewing experience, what are some common problems that authors face?
   Common problems include insufficient methodological details, which limit reproducibility; the exaggeration of contributions without adequate comparison to existing approaches; and weak experimental validation, often based on limited datasets or unrepresentative scenarios. In interdisciplinary fields, I frequently observe a lack of balance between theoretical development and practical validation.
4. For young scholars who are just beginning to participate in peer review, what specific advice would you offer?
   Reviewers should approach this task with constructive responsibility rather than evaluating the work aseptically. The role of a reviewer should positively contribute to research by providing suggestions that can improve the proposed work.
5. How has serving as a reviewer shaped your perspective on manuscript quality and improved your own writing or research practices?
   It has improved my ability to critically evaluate methodological consistency, identify potential weaknesses early on, and emphasize clarity and reproducibility in my work.
6. How do you see the role of reviewers evolving with advancements in artificial intelligence and automated tools in research publishing?
   Artificial intelligence should be understood as a support tool and not as a substitute for the reviewer. The evaluation of scientific originality, conceptual robustness, and the broader impact of research must remain in human hands.