Rules review of manuscripts

  1. Manuscripts must be accompanied by a letter from the university or institution where the article was performed. The letter can also recommend the article for publication in the journal. This letter signed by the head of the organization (the rector) or his deputy (Vice-Rector), the signature certified by the appropriate HR-structure.
  2.  
  3. Not allowed to publish an articles:
    • typed without the journal’s rules;
    • not relevant topics of the journal;
    • authors unreasonably refuse to rework articles.
  4.  
  5. The article submitted by the author is sent for review highly qualified specialists with a PhD and scientific specialization, closest to the subject of the article.
  6.  
  7. Reviewers are notified that they sent the manuscript is the intellectual property of the authors and are reportedly not subject to disclosure. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies for their own use. Breach of confidentiality is only possible in the case of alleged inaccuracy or falsification of materials.
  8.  
  9. Expertise is confidential, the review is available to the author without signatures and the name, position and place of work of the reviewer.
  10.  
  11. Timing review in each case determined by the editors with the creation of conditions for the most rapid publication of articles. The maximum period between the date of receipt of the review (of the manuscript to the editor and to make editorial board decision) is 3 months.
  12.  
  13. For each scientific area are members of the editorial board (experts) in charge of reviewing this direction. The decision whether the publication is received after review by the Editorial Board for the formation of the next issue. The expert editorial board (PhD) is a member of the editorial board received a review and an opinion on the possibility of publication of the article in a magazine.
  14.  
  15. The procedure for informing the authors about the results of the review:
    • After a positive review editors inform the authors about the admission of articles for publication to publication deadlines;
    • after receiving reviews containing comments from reviewer to the article, the editors sent to the author a copy of the review with a proposal to modify the article in accordance with the reviewers’ comments or arguments (partially or completely) to refute them;
    • after receiving a negative review editors sent to the author a copy of the review and a motivated refusal to publish an article in a magazine.
  16.  
  17. Articles, modified or revised by the author, re-routed for review.