Procedure for reviewing papers

The submitted articles are reviewed in two stages:

 

1 stage: formal review;

 

2 stage: analysis of the content.

 

The formal examination checks the compliance of the manuscript to the Journal requirements for the content and format of the articles in accordance with the following criteria:

  • the authenticity of the article (Antiplagiat system check),
  • the authenticity of the results (basic results must not have been published before by the authors in scientific magazines),
  • the article must not be longer or shorter than it is recommended in the requirements,
  • UDC codes compliance to the content of the article,
  • accurate translation of the title, abstract and the list of the key words into English,
  • no grammar mistakes,
  • Article format requirements must be fulfilled.

 

In case of serious or mass violations of the requirements for the content and format of the article, the article is denied publication on the basis of formal requirements. In this case, the authors have the right to submit a reviewed text of the article on one occasion.

 

After the first stage is passed, the article is submitted to a member of the Editorial board or to an external expert.

 

The reviewer assesses the article based on the following criteria:

  • compliance with the topics of the Journal,
  • scientific relevance,
  • practical relevance,
  • accuracy of the results,
  • the quality of the text.

 

On the basis of the reviewer's (or reviewers') recommendations, the Editorial board gives the article one of the following statuses:

  • to publish,
  • to publish after review,
  • to deny publication.

 

If there are any comments, the text of the review (reviews) is sent to the authors of the article.

 

If the article has the status "to publish after review", the authors have the right to submit a reviewed text of the article to the board. In this case, the article must pass both review stages again. If the authors ignore the recommendations of the reviewer, the publication of the article is impossible. The authors can explain their refusal to meet the requirements of the reviewer in written. In this case the authors' explanation letter is referred to the reviewer who can agree or disagree with it. If the reviewers disagree with the explanation, the article is not published.

 

If an article is denied, the editorial board does not consider any future versions of this same article.