Aim and Scope

The aim of the journal is the research disciplines development on asserted topic in Russia and abroad, relevant to the priority fields of science development, technologies and equipment in the Russian Federation and the list of critical technologies of the Russian Federation.

The objectives of the journal are: promotion of advanced ideas in physics, mathematics, engineering sciences, participating in the implementation of the objectives accomplishment worded by the President of the Russian Federation in the Decree from 01.12.2016 No. 642, on the scientific and technological development of the Russian Federation and also on the import substitution on the of strategic development priority areas of the country appropriate to the remit of the journal, ensuring the provision of publishing areas for qualified personnel, the quality improvement of dissertation researches in the areas through the development of mechanism for professional and public discussion of their research results, education of the younger generation of scientists.

The publication will be useful to scientists working in the relevant fields of science, as well as postgraduates and students. The journal is actively published by leading scientists of the Russian Federation, including the All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Experimental Physics, the Scientific Research Institute for System Analysis of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Educational Informatics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Federal Institute for the Development of Education, etc.

Section Policies

Open Access Policy

 

“Proceedings in Cybernetics” («Vestnik kibernetiki») is an open-access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediately upon publication.

Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.

For more information please read BOAI statement.

Archiving

• Russian State Library (RSL)
• National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)

Peer-Review

Peer review of manuscripts is carried out in order to select the most valuable and relevant scientific papers, ensuring the maintenance of a high scientific level of the journal “Proceedings in Cybernetics” in general.

All materials submitted for publication following the requirements of the journal are subject to review.

Rules for submission of materials for reviewing

The Editorial Board admits for examination only the articles prepared in strict accordance with Guidelines for authors.

Article materials should be open for publication. Classified information cannot be considered for publication.

If the article matches the subjects of the journal and meets the requirements for registration, the Editorial Board will accept the manuscript for consideration and sends it for reviewing.

The organization of reviewing

Reviewing of manuscripts is carried out in 2 stages:

-        The first stage is dedicated to checking a content of the article on the availability of the borrowed text. This procedure is obligatory for all articles. The Editorial Board verifies all submitted articles through the Antiplagiat system. If the amount of genuine text is below 75% (thereby borrowing from one source may not be greater than 7%), the article is send back for revision with the appropriate justification.

-        The second stage is a single-blind review (the authors have no information about the reviewers and receive a letter with comments signed by the Publishing Editor or Deputy Chief Editor).

Members of the Editorial Board and the Editorial Council are invited to review, as well as reviewers who have recognized authority and have published papers in the area of the paper under review for the last 3 years. The reviewer must have the degree of a Doctor or Candidate of Sciences. The decision to select a reviewer for the examination of the article is made by the Chief Editor.

Reviewers are required to follow the Standards of Editorial Ethics of the peer-reviewed journal “Proceedings in Cybernetics”.

Each reviewer has the right to refuse to review if there is a clear conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of manuscript materials.

The reviewer should consider the article sent to him promptly and provide the Editorial Board with a properly executed review or a reasoned refusal to review.

The review period in each case is determined to take into account the creation of conditions for the most prompt publication of the article. If the editorial portfolio is full, the articles are sent for review in the order of priority following the schedule of work on each issue of the journal. The term may be extended if additional review is required and / or temporary absence of a specialist.

The reviewer must submit a review to the Editorial Board within 12 days following the receipt of the manuscript for the examination. If the review is not submitted within the prescribed period, the Editorial Board has the right to transfer the manuscript to another reviewer.

 

Based on the available reviews, at a meeting of the Editorial Board of the journal, a decision is made on the recommendation to publish the article in one of the issues of the journal “Proceedings in Cybernetics”. The final decision on publication is made by the Editorial Board.

In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Chief Editor.

In the event of a repeated negative review result, the manuscript of the article is rejected and is not subject to further consideration.

 

If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the article, the Editorial Board sends the author the text of the review with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them in part or in full. The finalization of the article should not take more than 7 days from the moment of sending an electronic message to the authors about the need to make changes.

If the authors refuse to finalize the materials, they must notify the Editorial Board with written notice of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version after a week from the day the review was sent, even if there is no information from the authors with a refusal to finalize the article, the editors remove it from the register. In such situations, the authors are sent a due notice on the removal of the manuscript from registration following the expiration of the time for revision.

If the author and reviewers have encountered insoluble contradictions regarding the manuscript, the Editorial Board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Chief Editor at a meeting of the Editorial Board.

An article submitted to the Editorial Board after revision is re-reviewed by the same reviewer or another one appointed at the discretion of the Editorial Board. The second

review is being executed.

 

After the Editorial Board decides on the publication of an article, the Publishing Editor informs the author about this and indicates the date of publication.

An article that is not recommended for publication by the Editorial Board is not accepted for reconsideration. A refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.

The Editorial Board keeps the reviews for 5 years. The Editorial Board sends the reviews or paper reject notices with explanations. It is also required to submit the reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon request.

The author has the right to study the text of a review.

Requirements to reviews

The review should objectively evaluate the scientific article and contain a comprehensive analysis of its scientific and methodological advantages and disadvantages. The review should include reasoned assessment of several parameters: scientific (theoretical, methodological or conceptual) level of the article; relevance of the problem raised in the article, scientific novelty, and originality of the material; scientific and practical significance of the research; the degree of assistance to development of scientific representations in the relevant field of knowledge; accuracy of the information provided by the author; accuracy and precision of the definitions and wording used (input) by the author; validity of findings; representativeness of practical material involved in the analysis; the degree of the illustrative of tables and figures given by the author; total list and analysis of all identified deficiencies, the statement of the absence of plagiarism, general conclusion about the expediency of the publication of the scientific article or its rejection and refinement.

The review should also include the evaluation of logic, language, and style of presentation, their compliance with the requirements and norms of the literary and scientific language.

The review is signed by an original signature of the reviewer.

Indexation

Articles in “Proceedings in Cybernetics” («Vestnik kibernetiki») are indexed by several systems:

• Russian Index for Science Citation (RISC) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
• Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.

Publishing Ethics

The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal “Proceedings in Cybernetics” are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org, and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, elaborated by the Elsevier Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications).

1. Introduction

 

1.1. All articles submitted for publication in the journal “Proceedings in Cybernetics” are peer-reviewed, reviewed for originality, ethics and significance.

The publication in a peer-reviewed journal serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for a society-owned or sponsored journal: “Proceedings in Cybernetics”.

1.2. The publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.

1.3. The publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programs record “the minutes of science” and we recognize our responsibilities as the keeper of those “minutes” in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1. Publication Decision

The Editor of the journal “Proceedings in Cybernetics” is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions.

The Editor and the Editorial Board of the journal decide which of the submitted articles should be published, based on the compliance with the publishing guidelines and peer-review. The articles are accepted solely based on their scientific value.

The Editorial Board is guided by the journal’s policy and does not allow the publication of articles with signs of libel, insult, plagiarism or copyright infringement.

The Editor may consult with other Editors and Reviewers (or scholars of the Scientific Society) during the decision to publish. The final decision to publish an article is made by the Chief Editor of the journal.

2.2. Fair Play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2.3. Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff of the journal “Proceedings in Cybernetics” 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.

2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other members 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 to the papers.

The editorial board is under obligation to require all participants to disclose competing interests.

2.5. Vigilance over Published Record

An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

2.6. Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

An editor 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.

2.7. Ethical Complaints

The editors promptly consider each claim of an ethical nature concerning the submitted manuscript or published article, regardless of the time it was received. In the case of confirmation of the validity of the claim, a revision, retraction or other relevant statement is published. The editors have the right to refuse to publish the article, stop further cooperation with the Author, and also take other necessary measures to further suppress the unethical behavior of this Author.

2.8. Citation of the publication in which the work is published.

Under no circumstances should the editors force the Authors to cite the journal “Proceedings in Cybernetics” as a necessary condition for accepting the manuscript for publication. Any recommendations for citing papers as part of the peer-review procedure should be based on their scientific significance and should aim at improving the material presented.

3. Duties of Reviewers

3.1. 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 formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

3.2. Promptness

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 of the journal “Proceedings in Cybernetics” and excuse himself from the review process.

3.3. Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

3.4. Standard and Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3.5. 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.

3.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

3.6.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

3.6.2. 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 to the papers.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1. Reporting Standards

4.1.1. Authors of 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 detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

4.2. 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 should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

4.3. Originality and Plagiarism

4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.3.3. All submitted articles are checked for plagiarism. Furthermore, the layouts of all issues (including the entire digitized archive) are uploaded to the database of Surgut State University Antiplagiat, which helps prevent duplicate publications.

4.4. Scientific Research Validity

Authors should provide reliable research results. Scientific results must be presented correctly and objectively. Consciously erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable.

4.5. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

4.5.1. An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.5.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. 

4.5.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned 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. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.

4.5.4. All articles are checked in Internet search engines to identify works published previously in other publications or with other authorship.

4.6. Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgement 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 privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

4.7. 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. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts 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.

4.8.2. 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 possible stage.

4.9. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learns 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.

 

Founder

Surgut State University, Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug – Ugra, Russian Federation.

Author fees

Publication in “Proceedings in Cybernetics” («Vestnik kibernetiki») is free of
charge for all the authors.

The journal does not have any Article processing charges.
The journal does not have any Article submission charges.

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential 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 to the papers.

Plagiarism detection

“Proceedings in Cybernetics” («Vestnik kibernetiki») use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followe.

Preprint and postprint Policy

Prior to acceptance and publication in “Proceedings in Cybernetics” («Vestnik kibernetiki»), authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in “Proceedings in Cybernetics” («Vestnik kibernetiki») we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Glossary (by SHERPA)

Preprint - In the context of Open Access, a preprint is a draft of an academic article or other publication before it has been submitted for peer-review or other quality assurance procedure as part of the publication process. Preprints cover initial and successive drafts of articles, working papers or draft conference papers.

 

Postprint - The final version of an academic article or other publication - after it has been peer-reviewed and revised into its final form by the author. As a general term this covers both the author's final version and the version as published, with formatting and copy-editing changes in place.

 

ISSN 1999-7604 (Online)

 

ISSN 1999-7604 (Online)