The procedure for reviewing manuscripts of articles submitted to the editorial office of the scientific journal

All articles submitted to the editorial office are independently reviewed.

The manuscript of a scientific article submitted to the editorial office of the journal is reviewed by the executive secretary for compliance with the profile of the journal (according to the UDC and keywords) and fulfillment of the necessary requirements for registration. After making sure that all formal requirements are met, the executive secretary sends the article for "blind" review. For the objectivity of the assessment, the text of the article without attribution and other personalized information is reviewed by members of the editorial board of the journal or qualified researchers from other organizations with professional knowledge and experience in a particular scientific field.

Within the established review deadlines, on average at least 6 months, the reviewer studies and evaluates the relevance, scientific novelty and significance, practical novelty and significance, quality of preparation and design of the materials of the article according to a 10-point system. High-quality performance of the work provides a recommendation for publication. In case of insufficient elaboration of the main provisions of the article, the reviewer makes specific comments and makes recommendations for correcting and finalizing the text. The executive secretary of the journal sends comments to the author and suggests taking them into account when preparing a new version of the article or refuting them in a reasoned way (partially or completely). The article sent to the author for revision must be returned in a corrected form within a month. The date of receipt to the editorial office is the date of return of the revised article after the reviewer's comments.

Non-compliance with the rules of the article design, weakness / lack of scientific novelty and significance give the reviewer the right to a negative review. If there is a negative review of the manuscript or a revised version after comments, the article is rejected with mandatory notification of the author of such a decision.

The editorial board does not enter into a meaningful discussion of articles with the authors, does not correspond about the methods and principles of writing and formatting scientific articles, and does not fine-tune articles to the necessary scientific and methodological level.