The journal peer-reviews all received articles, relevant to its area, for purposes of expert assessment. All reviewers are recognized experts in the area of the peer-reviewed materials and have, over the past 3 (three) years, publications in area of the peer-reviewed article. Publisher and editors store reviews for 5 (five) years.
Articles, being published in scientific journal “Informational and mathematical technologies in science and management”, undergo double blind peer review.
The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for publishing an article in a journal. Reviews are discussed at the meetings of the working group. The author of the article is informed by e-mail about the results of the review, he is given the opportunity to read the text of the review.
Decision to publish article is made by the journal’s editorial staff on the basis of reviews with expert assessments of reviewers, taking into account the compliance of the submitted materials with the thematic focus of the journal, their scientific significance and relevance.
The journal utilizes double blind peer review. Review process is carried out by members of editorial board and third-party specialists from the base of experts (reviewers), on behalf of the editorial board.
In each case, review period is set by editorial board to create conditions to publish an article as quick as possible.
A review must contain a qualified analysis of the article’s material and its objective assessment. The reviewer gives a recommendation (positive or negative) regarding the possibility of publishing the article.
Editors send comments to an author with a proposal to consider the recommendations when preparing a new version of the article or to reasonably refute them. An article edited by the author is sent for a new review. In case of positive conclusion of the reviewer, the article is queued for publication.
The final decision to publish controversial articles is made by the chief editor or its deputy.
The reviewer can not be an author (or co-author) of the article being reviewed.
All reviews are uploaded to the National Electronic Library (Natsionalnaya Elektronnaya Biblioteka – NEB) elibrary.ru. They are displayed at reviewer’s profile, but not publicly available.
Articles, accepted for publication, are printed within six months after approval (positive conclusion). Articles that sent for revision – after remarks are fixed.
Chief editor is responsible for the quality of the reviews and timeliness of peer-review process.
Editors send to the authors of the materials copies of reviews or motivated decline. Editors undertake to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, in case if such demand will be received.
The maximum review period is 3 (three) months.← Назад