На первом этапе все рукописи статей в зависимости от их направления и тематики поступают к членам редакционной коллегии, ответственным за научный уровень статей каждого из разделов журнала, на предмет их соответствия политики журнала, требованиям и рубрикам журнала. Процесс рассмотрения рукописи занимает, как правило, 7-10 дней. В случае положительного решения членов редакционной коллегии рукопись статьи поступает к как минимум двум рецензентам на "двойное слепое" рецензирование (рецензент незнает имя автора, автор - не знает имени рецензента). Через, примерно, 2-3 недели, комментарии и замечания рецензента передаютьсяавтору статьи вместе с рекомендациями о возможном редактировании и доработке рукописи.Так же рецензент составляет отчет (при необходимости) автору статьи и редакции журнала или о принятии рукописи без доработки, или же дает возможность автору повторно ознакомиться с рукописью статьи и повторно представить ее в редакции после доработки и устранения замечаний, или же о полном отклонения рукописи без возможности повторной ее подачи в редакцию журнала.
Политика открытого доступа
Статьи этого журнала непосредственно доступны всем желающим, исходя из принципа, что свободный открытый доступ к результатам исследований способствует увеличению всеобщего знания.
National Technical University «KhPI» as the publisher of journal Herald of the National Technical University «KhPI» Series «Informatics and Modeling» provides support of Elsevier statement of publishing ethics (http://www.elsevier.com/about/publishing-guidelines/publishing-ethics).
National Technical University «KhPI» agrees that monitoring publishing ethics is a major aspect of the editorial and peer-review process, and as such lies within the area of responsibility of the editor-in-chief, or scientific editor, of each journal.
National Technical University «KhPI» has accepted the guidelines worked out by Elsevier to support editors, reviewers and authors in keeping to ethical principles. Also National Technical University «KhPI» is closely collaborates with other publishers to set standards for best practices on ethical matters. These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies.
Duties of the Editor of the journal Herald of the National Technical University «KhPI» Series «Informatics and Modeling»
The editor of the journal Herald of the National Technical University «KhPI» Series «Informatics and Modeling» is responsible for deciding what articles that were submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor must be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as libel avoidance, copyright infringement and plagiarism will be a force. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
The editor of the journal Herald of the National Technical University «KhPI» Series «Informatics and Modeling» must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor of the journal Herald of the National Technical University «KhPI» Series «Informatics and Modeling» and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own researches without without the author’s written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept in confidence and not used for personal advantage.
Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected with the papers.
Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if the interests’ conflict was revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations.
Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
The editor of the journal Herald of the National Technical University «KhPI» Series «Informatics and Modeling» should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society).
Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of the formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method.
National Technical University «KhPI» shares the view of Elsevier that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research own researches without the author’s written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept in confidence and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected with the papers.
Duties of Authors
Authors of the reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and in any event should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, it has to be appropriately cited or quoted then.
Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another paper (without attribution), to claiming results from the research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
In general, an author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
In general, an author should not submit previously published paper for consideration in another journal. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., translations) in more than one journal can be justifiable sometimes, but if certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the concerned journals must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. When there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human as a subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage which is possible.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide the evidence of the correctness of the original paper tothe editor.
The peer-review process is at the heart of the success of scientific publishing. As a part of our commitment to the protection and enhancement of the peer-review process, National Technical University «KhPI» has an obligation to assist the scientific community in all aspects of publishing ethics, especially in cases of (suspected) duplicate submission or plagiarism.
Address of the journal editorial office:
Editorial office of the journal Herald of the National Technical University «KhPI» Series «Informatics and Modeling»
National Technical University «KhPI»,
Kyrpychova street, 2, Kharkiv, 61002, Ukraine.
Telephone: +38-057-707-61-98 – the Editing and Publishing Department.
The reference to the journal is obligatory in the cases of complete or partial use of its materials.