Аuthorization:
Login:
Password:
  















Нашли ошибку?

Reviewing procedure for scientific submissions to Editorial Board of Mining Informational and Analytical Bulletin (GIAB)

 

Reviewing procedure 

for scientific submissions 

to Editorial Board of Mining Informational and Analytical Bulletin (GIAB) 

 

 

1. Initial examination is performed by the Executive Secretary of the editorial Board of PROC. In the initial examination considers the accompany-ing documents, evaluates the relevance of a research article to the journal profile, the execution rules and the requirements set by the editorial Board, which are available on the journal's website www.GIAB-online.ru.

2. In accordance of the manuscript to the journal profile, established rules and requirements, it is accepted by the editorial office and is sent for review, in case of inconsistency - the article is rejected without further review.

3. The form of review articles:

• in reviewing the wording GIAB;

• reviewing specialist profile submitted articles;

• third-party review (the author of the article review written by a reviewer not associated with the place of work (study) the authors of the article, and certified in the prescribed manner; the editorial Board reserves the right to conduct additional review).

4. Submitted manuscripts are forwarded for reviewing to the GIAB Editorial Board members who specialize in the relevant research areas, or to other scientific and technical experts in the question areas (doctors or candidates of science), having in the past 3 years publications on the subject of peer-reviewed articles. 

5. All participants in the process of preparing the manuscript for publication should inform the editorial staff about potential causes for conflict of interest. The authors have the right to specify in the cover letter, the names of those professionals who, in their opinion, it is not necessary to send the manuscript for review in connection with the possible, as a rule, a professional, a conflict of interest. This information is confidential and is taken into account while organizing the review. The reviewers are obliged to inform the editorial Board about the possibility of a conflict of interest when reviewing and the reasons that may affect their opinion about the manuscript. They have the right to refuse to review specific articles, if they consider it justified. The editor does not appoint external reviewers if there is a chance of conflict of interest.

6. Reviewers are notified on the manuscripts being intellectual property of the author(-s) not subjected to disclosure. Reviewers are not allowed to copy manuscripts. 

7. Reviewing is confidential. Off-the-record reviewer’s comments are only sent to manuscript author(-s) upon written request, with no specified name, position and affiliation of reviewers. On demand of councils of experts, reviewer’s comments may be forwarded to the Higher Attestation Committee of Russian Federation. 

8. Review times are stipulated by the Editorial Board individually for every manuscript, subject to the earliest possible publishing. 

9. Given a manuscript is rejected, the author(-s) receives reviewer’s feedback and is offered either to revise the manuscript in accordance with the reviewer’s comments, or to submit a well-defined confutation for the pointed remarks (in full or partly). In this case, the manuscript submission date is assumed the date of submission of the revised manuscript. 

10. Revised manuscripts are subject to reviewing.

11. Editorial Board makes its decision on acceptance of articles at regular meetings. 

12. Editorial Board offers acceptance notification upon request. In case of non-acceptance, the author(-s) receives a reasoned rejection. 

13. Reviews are kept in the publishing house and the editorial office within 5 years.

14. No reviewing is required for: 

- Manuscripts if the author or the first co-author is a member of Russian Academy of Sciences, Academy of Mining Sciences, Russian Academy of Natural Sciences; 

- Advisories and adverts. 

Site map