Editorial process

PROCEDURE FOR PEER REVIEW OF ARTICLES
published in the scientific and technical journal “Problems of Automation and Control”

  1. All articles submitted to the editorial office of the journal are subject to mandatory internal independent peer review.

  2. The purpose of peer review is to facilitate a rigorous selection of author manuscripts for publication.

    The objectives of peer review are to:

    • determine whether the material presented in the article corresponds to the journal’s scope;

    • assess the relevance of the article’s content and its compliance with current achievements in science and technology;

    • evaluate the scientific novelty and originality of the research results obtained;

    • verify compliance with formatting requirements, including conformity of length and structure; the presence of abstracts and keywords in Kyrgyz, Russian, and English; correctness of references and in-text citations; formatting of tables and illustrations; as well as the availability of authors’ contact information;

    • assess the scientific and literary quality of the presentation;

    • formulate well-reasoned overall conclusions on the article, comments, and, if necessary, recommendations for revision.

  3. Scientific articles prepared in accordance with the Publication Formatting Guidelines (Appendix No. 1) are submitted to the journal’s editorial office to the Executive Secretary, where they are registered, classified by subject area, and forwarded for internal peer review.

  4. For internal peer review, articles by staff members and postgraduate students are assigned to subject-matter specialists from among highly qualified experts approved by an order of the Editor-in-Chief.

  5. Members of the Editorial Board of the journal “Problems of Automation and Control”, as well as leading scientists and specialists from other organizations and institutions with extensive professional knowledge and experience in the relevant scientific field, may be engaged as reviewers.

  6. Reviewers who are not members of the Editorial Board are involved in the review process on a voluntary, unpaid basis.

  7. The organization of the consideration and discussion of materials intended for publication is carried out by the Executive Secretary of the journal.

  8. Scientific articles submitted from other organizations undergo a similar review procedure and are accepted for consideration provided that an external review is available.

  9. Reviewers are informed that the manuscripts submitted to them constitute the intellectual property of the authors and contain confidential information. The review process is confidential. Breach of confidentiality is permitted only in cases where the reviewer declares unreliability or falsification of the materials presented in the article.

  10. The review must address the following aspects:

    • compliance of the article’s content with the declared subject matter;

    • conformity of the article’s content with the current level of scientific achievements and the advisability of its publication;

    • identification of the article’s strengths as well as its shortcomings and comments;

    • a conclusion recommending or not recommending the article for open publication.

  11. Reviews are forwarded to the authors of the articles. The editorial office retains the reviews for the current year.

  12. If the review indicates the need for revision, the manuscript is returned to the author for correction. The revised article is then sent for re-review, as a rule, to the same reviewer.

  13. The editorial office reserves the right to reject an article if the author refuses to take into account substantiated comments and recommendations of the reviewer and the editorial office.

  14. In case of disagreement with the reviewer’s conclusion, the author has the right to submit a reasoned written response to the editorial office. The article may be sent for re-review or submitted for consideration by the Editorial Board.

  15. The decision on the advisability of publishing an article after peer review is made by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if necessary, by the Editorial Board.

  16. A scientific article that has received a positive expert opinion and is recommended for publication is forwarded for inclusion in an issue of the journal in accordance with its thematic scope.

  17. The review period for articles must not exceed one month.

Editor-in-Chief of the Journal
Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor
I. V. Bryakin