The procedure of manuscripts reviewing

Procedure for reviewing manuscripts submitted

for publication in the journal PAST

“Materials Technology and New Materials” Series

1. Each manuscript for the scientific articles that have been submitted to the journal must begin the approval process after the author has given his permission for information exchange completed in the prescribed manner. There should be two positive reviews for the publication of an article.

3. The manuscript for the scientific article is to be viewed by the editorial board as being in conformity with the profile of the journal and meeting all requirements, and if so is then sent on to be reviewed by experts.

4. Reviewing is to be carried out by the members of the journal's editorial having the closest expertise in the subject of the article and external review. The author or co-author cannot review the article, but a scientific advisor of the author(s) can. Reviews are to be certified in the manner prescribed by the institution where the reviewer works.

5. Reviewers are notified that the submitted articles are the intellectual property of the authors and contain information not to be disclosed. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of articles and send them to third parties.

6. Reviews are to be conducted confidentially from the authors. Reviews are available to the author of the manuscripts if a written request has been made, and it is given without the signature, name, position, or workplace of the reviewer.

7. Upon request, reviews must be submitted to the Higher attestation commission.

8. The terms of reviewing manuscripts:

8.1. The editorial board will review the manuscript within ten (10) working days from its receipt in the office.

8.2. Experts reviewing the article have twenty (20) working days to review the article from the day the manuscript has been transferred to them.

9. Review content:

- relevance of the article content to its name and annotation;

- relevance of the research topic;

- scientific importance of the results;

- the appropriateness of the article's publication based on previously published articles on this subject;

- submission attributes (language, style, coherence, etc).

10. The reviewer has the right to make recommendations to the author and editors to improve the manuscript. Reviewer comments and suggestions should be objective and principles, aimed at improving the overall level of the manuscript.

11. The final section of the review should contain one of the following decisions:

- a recommendation for the manuscript to be published in its current form;

- a recommendation for the manuscript to be published with designated technical changes;

- a recommendation for the manuscript to be published after the reviewer's comments have been resolved and with a following approval from the reviewer;

- a recommendation for the board to refuse to publish the article, does not suit the journal. The reviewer must justify their opinion.

12. In cases where the reviewer has decided that the article must have modifications, or that the article has been refused from publication, the text must be sent to the author of the manuscript within ten (10) working days from the date of its signature with the term specified within which the corrections are to be performed (no more than 20 working days)

13. The article modified (revised) by the author is to be re-submitted for review. If the reviewer had made a negative decision, the article is to be considered rejected and no longer subject to review by the editorial board.

14. In the event of a positive decision taken by the reviewer, the article shall be deemed accepted for publication in the journal, with a mandatory notice given to the author.

15. Original articles and reviews are stored at the editorial office of the journal at least 5 (five) years from the date of their receipt.

Editor-in-Chief PAST “Material Technology and New Materials” L.I. Ponomarev