Aim and Scope

Last update: 30.12.2023

The main aim of the Journal is generalization of scientific and practical knowledge in material science, mechanical engineering, power engineering (including nuclear energetics), mechanics, heat- and mass-exchange technologies, informational technologies, electronics, instrument engineering, nanotechnologies, technical diagnostics, non-destructive control, safety of technical-systems and nature objects.

Both Belarusian and foreign scientists are welcome to publish in the Journal. The Journal targets at Belarusian and foreign scientists, as well as at Ph. D. and Doctoral students of universities from all over the world. The main criteria for publication are the novelty and informative value of submitted articles.

The types of admitted articles – original articles and reviews.

The Journal provides direct access to its content based on the next principle: free and open access to research results contributes to increase in global exchange of knowledge.

The policy of open access corresponds to the definition of Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) and means the articles are accessible in the open access in Internet; that allows all users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or refer to the full texts of these articles, scan them for indexing, use as a data for programs of use for any other allowed purposes without financial, legal or technical obstacles, excluding these which corresponds with the access to the Internet itself.

Additional information can be found in Budapest declaration (https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/).

Section Policies

MATERIALS SCIENCES AND ENGINEERING, METALLURGY

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING AND MECHANICS

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

POWER ENGINEERING, HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES AND SYSTEMS

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

RADIOELECTRONICS AND INSTRUMENT-MAKING

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

DIAGNOSTICS AND SAFETY OF TECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENT SYSTEMS

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Publication Frequency

4 issues per year

Archiving

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

Peer-Review

Last update: 30.12.2023

Submitted articles obligatorily pass through reviewing, which includes the following stages:

I. Evaluation of the article by senior editor of the Journal in order to ensure that it meets the main requirements for publications, approved by the Editorial Board. The evaluation takes no more than 3 days after the moment of receipt of the article.

II. Peer review is carried out by two specialists – appointed by the editorial staff — with corresponding expertise and possessing a scientific degree. Peer review is made voluntarily and gratuitously. Reviewing procedure is confidential (“blind one-sided” (anonymous) reviewing). Reviewers are notified that manuscripts, sent for reviewing, are the authors’ intellectual property.

For the convenience of reviewers, the Editorial Board proposes to use a form with designation of all required criterion to evaluate the manuscript (originality, logical strictness, statistic strictness, clarity and conciseness of writing style, theoretical significance, reliability of results, actuality for modern research areas, reproducibility of results, covering of literature sources, application of results).

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus

Physical-technical series

REVIEWER’S CONFIDENTIAL FEEDBACK

Author(s):

Article:

Recommendations and comments should be sent to the Editorial Board in 30 days. If impossible, please immediately return the article, preferably with indication of appropriate reviewer.

Reviewer (full name, scientific degree, scientific rank, position) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Signature_______________________

Date___________________________

Term or review is no shorter than 4 weeks.

Articles by chief editor, deputy editor, Editorial Board members are considered on general grounds and are directed for the review to the specialists, not affiliated with these persons.

There is an opportunity for the authors to get familiar with the text of the review.

III. Evaluation by the Editorial Board. In case of positive peer review, the article is delivered for visa to an Editorial Board member, who supervises corresponding branch of science. Articles, approved by Editorial Board members, are discussed at the Editorial Board meeting, which takes place once in 3 months. The Editorial Board confirms a list of articles to be published in an actual issue of the Journal. In case of appearing of questions, the Editorial Board has a rule to reject the article and to assign an additional peer review.

IV. Reporting to authors on peer-review status

1. In case of both a positive peer review and approval by an Editorial Board member, we enqueue the article for publication, according to the individual priority level. The author can request information about approximate dates of publication by editors’ e-mail: ftvesti@mail.ru.
2. It is obligatory for an author to acquaint himself with page proofs of the article and to confirm the consent to its publication.
3. In case of negative peer review, we send a copy of review text to the author.
4. If an article is returned to authors for revision after the review, Editorial Board considers the revised manuscript again.
5. If an author of article disagrees with reviewer’s opinion, he can write a reasoned answer to the editorial office of the Journal. In such a case, the article may be directed either for repeated peer review, or to the Editorial Board for negotiation.
6. Articles cannot be published:

а) if they don’t meet the design requirements and their authors refuse technical revision;

б) if their authors don’t follow reviewer’s constructive remarks or don’t disprove them in a well-argued manner.

Indexation

Last update: 30.12.2023

Articles in “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” are indexed by several systems:

• Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – 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.
• Dimensions
• VINITI RAS
• WorldCat
• CAS
• EDS

Publishing Ethics

Last update: 30.12.2023

The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the Journal “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” 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. The publication in a peer reviewed learned 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 society-owned or sponsored Journal “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Physical-Technical Series”.

1.2. 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. 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 an Editorial Board member

2.1. In order to supply the Journal, Editorial Board members are recommended to publish 1 article (personal or in cooperation) per two years.

In absence of external peer reviewers, an Editorial Board member can review incoming manuscripts by his competence. Any Editorial Board member obtains for review no more than 2 manuscripts per year. Reviewing should be done in accordance with approved Policies of Journal review.

Being asked by the leading Journal editor, members of the Editorial Board choose peer reviewers for incoming articles and control the process or incoming articles reviewing.

Members of the Editorial Board make the decision on the possibility of article publication after all rounds of reviewing. All decisions are passed the chief editor, who makes the final decision on the possibility of publication.

Members of the Editorial Board invite authors and peer reviewers to collaborate with the Journal.

2.2. A member of the Editorial Board may be removed from the board due to the next reasons:

• violation of publication ethics: concealment of conflict of interest, information; use of the position for personal purposes;
• nonperformance of assigned duties for a year without good excuse and without agreement with chief editor;
• at own will of the Editorial Board member.

2.3 Editorial Board member’s privileges

Articles by the members of the Editorial Board of the journal “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-Technical Series” are considered in priority order. A member of the Editorial Board can act as an invited editor for a special issue of the journal. Information on a member of the Editorial Board is placed at the journal website with required links to profiles in databases, institutional affiliations and other necessary data.

3. Duties of Editors

3.1. Publication decision

The Editor of a learned “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” 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 (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” journal’s Editorial Board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

3.2. 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.

3.3. Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff of “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-Technical Series” 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.

3.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

3.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’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.

3.4.2. 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 to the papers.

3.5. 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.

3.6. 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.

4. Duties of Reviewers

4.1. 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.

4.2. 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 “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” and excuse himself from the review process.

4.3. 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.

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

4.5. 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.

4.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

4.6.1. 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.

4.6.2. 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.

5. Duties of Authors

5.1. Reporting standards

5.1.1. 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.

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

5.2. 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.

Research data includes any actual data in digital or analog form stored on arbitrary data storage, used at research process to obtain the results. It can be a data in a table form, source code, images, audio- and video files, documents, maps, processed or unprocessed data. The current policies is applied regarding research data, which can be required for confirmation of reliability of investigation results, which are described in articles published by the journal. Research data includes results, obtained directly by the authors (“initial data”), as well as some data, analyzed by the authors from other sources (“secondary data”).

Data not to be disclose can be transferred by storing in repositories of research data with limited access. An author can also present to public access only the metadata of research data and/or description of manner of their access by request of other scientists.

Providing access by the authors to the data obtained during research, which grounds the content of their publications, is greeted but is not necessary. Author’s permission to providing access to the research data does not affect the decision on the publication.

5.3. Originality and Plagiarism

5.3.1. 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.

5.3.2. 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.

5.4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

5.4.1. 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.

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

5.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, 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.

5.5. 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 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.

5.6. Authorship of the Paper

5.6.1. According to criterion of authorship (designed and described in ICMJE recommendations), authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study; who have composed the draft of the manuscript or critically revised it with addition of valued intellectual content; who approved the final version of the manuscript to be published; agreed with the responsibility for all aspects of the study and can guarantee that all questions on correctness and fairness of any part of the study can be investigated and resolved in a proper way. Besides the responsibility for the parts the Author has fulfilled by himself, he (she) should know, which co-authors are responsible for other concrete parts of the study. Besides, an Author should be convinced of the fairness of the contributions of his co-authors. All the persons who are described as the Authors should meet all the above mentioned criteria an Author is subjected; and all the persons which meet these criteria should be identified as the Authors.

Persons, who do not meet all the above mentioned criteria should be noted in the “Acknowledgments” section.

5.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on 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.

5.7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

5.7.1. 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.

5.7.2. If the work involves the use of animal or human 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.

5.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

5.8.1. 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.

5.8.2. 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.

5.9. 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 of “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” journal and cooperate with Publisher 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.

6. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)

6.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

6.2. The publisher should support “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

6.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.

6.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.

The section is prepared according to the files of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE – http://publicationethics.org/).

Founder

• The National Academy of Sciences of Belarus

Author fees

Last update: 30.12.2023

Publication in “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” is free of charge for all the authors.

The Journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.

The Journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Last update: 30.12.2023

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

Last update: 30.12.2023

“Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series” use native Russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.

Preprint and postprint Policy

Last update: 30.12.2023

Prior to submission for acceptance in “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series”, authors may make their manuscripts available as preprints in profile or institutional repositories. Preprint is defined by COPE as a scientific manuscript, which is posted at an open framework by the authors (usually before or simultaneously with the process of reviewing in a journal).

Preprint publication is not considered as a duplicate publication and doesn’t influence the editor’s decision on the publication in the journal.

As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been accepted for publication in an other scientific journal. An author is responsible for addition the preprint with a link to the published article. The link should include DOI and URL of the version of the article published at the Journal website. Initial preprint version shouldn’t be altered based on peer reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The preprint text shouldn’t be replaced with the text of the published article.

Articles that have been published earlier by authors on personal or public websites, having no connection with other publishers, are permitted for submission.

Manuscripts, accepted for publication

The Journal Editorial Board allows archiving manuscripts, that passed peer reviewing stage and are accepted for publication, by yourself. To distribute that version of the manuscript, the authors can use:

• personal website or blog;
• institutional repository;
• subject repository;
• direct conversation with students or lectures, to pass that version of the article for personal use.

The author should mention the status of the manuscript and information about its planned publication in the manuscript text.

For example, “The article “Article title” has passed peer review, has been accepted for publication and will be published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Physical-technical series, No 3, 2021”.

After publication of the final version of the manuscript, the author is responsible for addition the record of publication with the link to the published article. The text of the publication shouldn’t be altered on the base of the peer reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The text of the already published version of the manuscript shouldn’t be altered or deleted.

Final versions of the manuscripts

The journal Editorial Board allows authors to archive manuscripts that passed the peer review stage, are accepted for publication and passed editorial-publisher processing (proof-read and edited) on their own.

To publish that version of the manuscript, the authors can use:

• Personal website or blog;
• institutional repository;
• subject repository;
• direct conversation with students or lectures, to pass that version of the article for personal use.

After publication of the final version of the manuscript, the author is responsible for addition the record of publication with the link to the published article. The text of the publication shouldn’t be altered on the base of the peer reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The text of the already published version of the manuscript shouldn’t be altered or deleted.