4. Regulations for submission, review and publication scientific papers in scientific and technical journal “Automation and Modeling in Design and Management”                                                                               

1. To the publication should be accepted scientific and scientific-engineering papers showing the results of investigations carried out by an author (authors), scientific reviews, proceedings of scientific activities (symposiums, conferences, seminars and so on) which must correspond to journal themes.

2. The authors should present original works containing reliable results of the scientific work done. When using a text or graphic documentation borrowed from the works of other persons the essential references to the corresponding publication are to be carried out. If manuscript elements are already published elsewhere earlier, then the authors must refer to an earlier work having pointed out a difference of the new work from the previous ones.

3. Paper submissions to more than one journal are unacceptable and considered to be author’s unethical behavior.

4. For paper publication in the journal the following should be submitted either to the editorial board in an electronic way (aim-pu@mail.ru), or at the registration at the electronic editorial board of the journal on the site (https://bstu.editorum.ru/ru/nauka/journal/93/view):   

* Text of the paper with signatures of all authors (file with extension .pdf);

* Text of the paper (file with extension.doc or docx carried out in Word text editor; version Word-2007);

* Peer-review conclusions on a possibility of the paper material publication in open publication (file with extension.pdf);

* Written recommendations of a scientific adviser (for post graduate students, Master degree competitors and students without co-authors) (file with extension.pdf);

* Package of pictures and illustrations (besides those inserted into a text) (each Figure should be a single tiff, pdf, jpg with the extension not less than 300 dpi).

* List of captions to the Figures and Illustrations;

A paper text should be read by the author.

5. All reviewers are recognized peer-reviewers for the material under reviewing and in the course of three years past have their publications on the themes of the paper under reviewing. As peer-reviewers may be recruited the journal editorial board member possessing professional knowledge and experience of the work in the scientific direction close to the theme of the author’s manuscript. The peer-reviewers’ recommendations are a reason for decision-making regarding a paper publication. Experts working in the same company where an author (authors) of the paper works should not be peer-reviewers. A review term should not exceed 25 days from the date of the paper submission to the editorial board of the journal. In the presence of the recommendation to update the paper or in case of the rejection to publish a copy of the review should be sent to the author. The paper reviews are kept at the editorial board in the course of 5 years.

6. Names of files submitted to the editorial board should begin with the name and initials of the first author (for instance, I.I. Ivanov, paper.docx, I.I. Ivanov_conclusion.pdf, I.I. Ivanov_Fig_1.jpg).

7. Paper volume – 5-10 pages A4 (mode of an automatic hyphenation) including diagrams, figures, tables, references and an abstract.

8. Manuscript should be single-spaced and contain:

* In the upper left-hand corner - UDC (letter height - 12 pt);

* To the right – initials, author’s (authors’) name separated by a comma (letter height -12 pt);

* Paper title (capital letter height – 14 pt, bold font, center located);

* Abstract (4 – 6 lines; letter height – 10 pt; indentation – 7 mm);

* Key words (6-8 words; letter height – 10 pt; indentation – 7 mm);

* Paper text (letter height – 12 pt; indention – 10 mm; margins: left, right, top and bottom – 20mm);

* References (letter height – 10 pt, heading – capital letters);

* Authors’ data: surname, name, patronymic (in full), academic degree, academic status, position, place of work, office phone, home phone, e-mail, (letter height – 10 pt, heading – capital letters, aligned right);

* Abstract in English and Russian (letter height – 10 pt; indentation – 7 mm).

Reference to grants and information on financial support of investigations carried out by the authors should be located at the end of the paper text (after section “Conclusion”).

9. The paper title of should be informative, reflecting clearly its content in a few words (mainly key ones). An abstract should give a possibility to define a basic content of the paper, identify its relevance, whether a reader should take notice of a full text of the paper (one of the options to form an abstract consists in a brief repetition of the paper structure including purposes, objects, methods and results). An abstract should be translated into English and has for an object to inform a foreign reader about the content of the paper. It should be informative (without general words), original (without duplicating results obtained and published earlier), meaningful (showing a purpose, methods, a procedure of the investigation carried out, results, brief conclusions on the work), structured (following a logic of the paper result description) and compact (15 – 20 lines).

10. The paper text should be structured. An introduction should contain an abstract account of a problem definition and a possible application of results in practice. A basic part should have some inner subdivisions (with subheadings) and contain a formalized problem definition and an offered method for its solution, a difference of the problem definition offered from those already known; an advantage of the method developed in comparison with existing ones (having an example confirming working capacity and efficiency of the solution offered). The paper should be completed with a substantial discussion (conclusion) of the results obtained.

11. Formulae, lettings (uppercase and lowercase letters of the Latin and Greek alphabets), numerals, symbols are supposed to be clear and detectable. All Latin and Greek lowercase letters should be set up in italics, all Russian and Greek uppercase ones - upright. Formulae should be typed in the formula editor of Microsoft Equation or MathType with size 12 pt.

12. Figures, diagrams, schemes, tables and other graphical materials are to be placed within a text (after their first reference) and should have captions (letter height – 10 pt, center aligned), and tables should have headings. A picture flow format is “round a frame”. In the pictures all inscriptions should be written upright with the uppercase letter, font: Times New Roman, letter height - 10 pt.

13. References should be compiled according to RSS (GOST) 7.0.5 - 2008 “Bibliographic Notation. General Requirements and Rules for Formation” and should not exceed 10 names of publications issued not earlier than in 1970.

14. Measure units of all physical values are to be in SI units.

15. The Editorial Board carries out the examination of the completeness of the documentation submitted (in accordance with Article 4), analyzes a text of the paper to identify borrowings with the use of the “Anti-plagiarism” system and reviews papers using criteria of topicality, scientific novelty, information value, correspondence to scientific-technical directions of the journal. 

16.  If according to the recommendation of the Editorial Council the paper is sent back for rework (up to 7 work days), then a date of the revised text submission is pointed out in the journal.

17. The authors do not receive fees.

18. The papers which do not correspond to the scope of the scientific-technical journal and do not meet the present requirements and also submitted with the completeness violations are not accepted for the peer-review. Manuscripts are not sent back. The Editorial Board is not bound to review all materials submitted and does not lead discussions with the authors of papers rejected.

In its activities the Editorial Board of the electronic journal “Automation and Modeling in Design and Management” follows the Law No. 2121-1 “On Mass Media” (Ed. on July 3, 2016)  of  December 27, 1991 of the Russian Federation, Regulations “On the Journal “Automation and Modeling in Design and Management”, and also the recommendations and standards of the Committee on Ethics      of Scientific Publications (COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors,http://publicationethics.org/).

The Editorial Board of the Journal does its best to comply with ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community, analyses and takes into account valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers.

The Declaration of Scientific Publication Ethics reveals general principles and regulations on the relationships of participants in scientific publication procedures (authors, peer-readers, editors, publishers).

EDITORIAL BOARD OBLIGATIONS

Manuscript Assessment

Papers submitted for the consideration must contain results obtained by the authors which were not published elsewhere.  

The review procedure of papers received by the Editorial Board of the Journal is directed to ensuring quality of scientific papers published in the Journal. All papers submitted to the Editorial Board for publication are to be subjected to all stages of review.  

A scientific paper undergoes a procedure of the review twice: an inner peer review is to be carried out by peer readers of the Journal Editorial Council; an external peer review is to be carried out by peer readers pronouncing independently their opinion regarding the level and definition of the presentation of the material presented its correspondence to the Journal scope, novelty and reliability of results. Peer readers’ recommendations are a reason for decision-making regarding paper publication. A paper may be rejected both at the stage of the inner peer review and at the stage of the external one.

The responsibility regarding decision-making for publication is completely in the competence of the Journal Editorial Board.  

The Editorial Board of the Journal makes a decision on publication following Journal policy, taking into account a current legislation in the field of the copyright assessing manuscripts solely according to their scientific content. In case of the Editorial Board and peer readers’ positive decision-making a paper is to be published in the next issue of the Journal at that the authors’ rights are reserved.

In case of publication refusal a motivated response is sent to the author. A manuscript of the paper rejected is being kept at the Editorial Board at least a year. A paper review should be sent to the author without a peer reader’s name and a term in the course of which the author may right back to the review. At the author’s motivated substantiation of the paper material a repeated peer review is carried out and a publication problem is solved.

Confidentiality

The editor and the Editorial Board staff have no right:

• To disclose information regarding papers submitted except corresponding authors, peer readers, other editorial advisers and, in case of need, a publisher;
•           To use in any way the unpublished material used in the manuscript presented without author’s consent.

Interests conflict and ethical conflicts resolution

In case of the interests conflict arisen caused by competitive relationships, a cooperation or other relationships and ties with one of the authors, companies or offices connected with the manuscripts submitted for consideration the Editor forwards the manuscript for consideration to other members of the Editorial Board or the Editorial Council. At filing an ethical complaint regarding a manuscript submitted or a paper published the Editor should undertake adequate measures jointly with the publisher. Each message on a fact of unethical action is to be considered, even if it is obtained years later after a paper publication. If a complaint is supported by the Editorial Board or by the Editorial Council of the Journal, then follows a publication of corresponding corrections, refutations or apologies.       

Storage and review provision

In accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation the reviews of scientific papers are kept at the Editorial Board of the Journal in the course of at least 5 years and may be submitted to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation when requested.

At the rejection of a paper for publication a paper review having reasons to decline publication is to be sent to the authors.  

PEER READERS’ OBLIGATIONS

Contribution to editorial decisions

A peer review of the peer reader promotes editorial decision-making and also contributes to the quality improvement of the paper to be published by means of the Editor and author cooperation.

When discussing an author’s response to the peer review a peer reader has the right to take part in debates.

Efficiency

A peer reader should inform the Editor and refuse to analyze a paper by virtue of an insufficient own competence for the analysis of the investigation presented in the paper and also because of a high workload which may cause problems in the efficiency of peer review preparation.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript submitted for the peer review should be considered as a confidential document. It is unacceptable to show it to other peer readers or discuss it with other experts without a preliminary permission of the Editor-in-Chief.

Impartiality standards

Peer readers must express their opinion clearly and substantiated: reviews of scientific works must be impartial and should not contain personal criticism of the author.

Sources confirmation

Peer readers must:

• Analyze sources used by the author and also reference identification quality of citations used in the paper;
• Reveal materials published in the manuscript under peer review which are quoted, but are not identified bibliographically by the author;
• Draw editor’s attention to a significant or partial similarity with any other work which is directly familiar to the peer reader.

Information disclosure and interests conflict

Confidential classified information or ideas which a peer reader familiarized himself with in the course of peer reviewing must be confidential and should not be used by the peer reader for the personal gain or transfer to the third parties. Peer readers should not be enlisted by the Editorial Board in the participation of the analysis and assessment of manuscripts in which the peer readers have their own interest. The unpublished material used in the manuscript submitted for the peer review to the Editorial Board should not be used by a peer reader in the own investigations without an author’s written consent. 

AUTHORS’ OBLIGATIONS

Reporting standards

Authors are to provide reliable results of the work done they should assess impartially the importance of the investigation carried out by them. Data found upon the investigations should be stated clearly in the paper which must contain sufficient information to check up and repeat experiments by other researchers. Before a paper transfer to the Editorial Board for the analysis the authors must obtain permission in the form of an expert conclusion of the office, where the authors work for the application of the paper content.    

The authors may place in the paper the information regarding financial support of the investigation the results of which are shown in it.

Data access and data storage

Authors may be requested to present initial data for the editorial analysis. They must be ready to provide a free access to such data, if it is required in the course of reasonable time past after their publication.

Singularity and plagiarism

Authors must provide only original works. When using text or graphic information obtained from other persons’ works references are essential to the corresponding publications or an author’s written permission.  In the course of the review of works presented by authors the Editorial Board checks up these works for plagiarism.

Multiple, repeated and competitive publications

Authors should point out in the abstract of the paper that their work is published for the first time. If parts of the manuscript are published in other paper, then the authors must make a reference to an earlier work and point out a significant difference of a new work from the previous one. A verbatim copying of own works and their paraphrasing are unacceptable they may be used only as a basis for new conclusions.

The paper submission simultaneously to several journals is considered to be an unethical action and unacceptable.

Sources confirmation

Authors must recognize a contribution of other persons influencing a character of the investigation carried out. References to the works used are essential. Information obtained from the third parties in private must not be used in the manuscript without their written permission for its use in the paper.

Paper authorship

The authors’ list must be limited with those, who made a significant contribution to the investigations, procedure and results of which are described in the paper. All persons, who made a considerable contribution to paper preparation, must be mentioned as co-authors. A paper may contain information of the participants of an investigation project. An author must ensure that the names of all co-authors and participants of the project are included in the lists of co-authors and participants and all co-authors permitted its publication being familiarized personally with the final version of the scientific work and having it approved.

The participants of the investigation project on material of which there was carried out a scientific paper and who had not been included into the list of paper co-authors should be mentioned in a separate reference after “Conclusion” section.  

Quality of the matter submitted

A paper must be formed in accordance with the requirements of the Editorial Board of the Journal. Any deviation from the requirements mentioned is allowed only in accordance with the agreement with the Editorial Board.

The information presented regarding the authors must be authentic. In case of any data changes the authors must inform of this fact the Editorial Board.

Significant errors in works published

If an author reveals a significant error or inaccuracy in his paper published, he must inform about this case immediately the Editor or the Publisher of the Journal and provide them assistance to eliminate or correct errors revealed.

If the Editor or the Publisher comes to know from the third party or from publications of other authors that a paper, published in the Journal, has significant errors, then the author must eliminate or correct them immediately, or present to the Editorial Board evidences of initial paper correctness. If the fact of significant error presence in the paper published is confirmed, then the Editorial Board must publish information regarding this case.

1. Inclusion into the editorial database the documentation package for scientific work publication sent from the authors to the Editorial Board e-mail or the electronic Editorial Board of the journal (on site).
2. Check-up of the material completeness presented by authors for scientific paper publication.
3. Manuscript check-up for borrowing presence with the use of “Anti-plagiarism” system. At the borrowing permissible level exceeding (more than 20%) follows the notification of authors regarding the necessity of correction the material submitted.
4. Peer review of a scientific paper by the staff of the Editorial Council of the Journal.
5. Maintenance of the paper peer review by the Editorial Council staff of the Journal.  
6. Notification of authors regarding the necessity of paper material improvement (in the presence of peer readers’ recommendations) or the refusal to publish a paper in the Journal (by e-mail).
7. Check-up of the peer readers’ remarks fulfillment (in the presence of remarks) by the authors.
8. Scientific and literary editing the electronic form of papers, essential assistance to authors in the matter of the paper structure improvement, terms choice, figures formation, references correction in accordance with RSS R 7.0.5-2008 “References. General Requirements and Rules of Formation”. 
9. Check-up in accordance with original sources the correctness of citations used and digital data, the application of names and their spelling, scientific-technical terms, measurement units, the correspondence of the symbols used to notations defined by standards or adopted in scientific literature.
10. Paper text agreement by means of e-mail after editing.
11. Technical translation into English of the paper title, author’s name, paper abstract, key words, authors’ data and references.
12. Preparation of the electronic version of the Licensing Agreement between the Editorial Board of the Journal and authors on authors’ data processing, metadata formation of the paper to be published to confer it the identifier of DOI (Digital Object Identifier) with the purpose of the further offer to a user of Internet a possibility to search, review and free use paper materials with the information, scientific and educational purposes (for papers recommended by peer readers for publication).
13. Formation of the printed version of the Licensing Agreement between the Editorial Board of the Journal and authors and its sending by post.
14. Correspondence with paper authors (receipt and recording the Licensing Agreement with authors).
15. Registration of paper authors and paper metadata in ASM (Automated System of Management) with marking them with the identifiers of  ORCID and sending to CrossRef, designation to the scientific publication of the authors the identifiers DOI. The introduction of DOI information in the printed version of the paper.
16. Makeup of the Journal and papers electronic model.
17. Made-up Journal model Proof-reading before printing.
18. Agreement of the Journal model with the Editor-in-Chief.
19. Journal duplication and location on the site of the Journal network version.
20. Journal electronic version Layout in the scientific electronic library (E-library.ru).
21. Journal electronic version layout on the site of the University.  
22. Journal distribution.

List of retracted articles

Publication fee is not charged.

Missiya izdaniya sostoit v predostavlenii otkrytoy ploschadki dlya original'nyh, vpervye publikuemyh issledovaniy v oblasti matematicheskogo modelirovanii, avtomatizacii tehnologicheskih processov i proizvodstv, sistem avtomatizacii proektirovaniya i upravleniya, kotorye sposobstvuyut rasprostraneniyu luchshey otechestvennoy i zarubezhnoy praktiki v dannyh sferah.

Politika izdaniya

Redakcionnaya politika izdaniya baziruetsya na sleduyuschih principah:

• ob'ektivnost' i bespristrastnost' v otbore statey s cel'yu ih publikacii;
• vysokaya trebovatel'nost' k kachestvu nauchnyh issledovaniy;
• soblyudenie dostovernosti, nauchnoy znachimosti i aktual'nosti publikuemyh rabot;
• kollegial'nost' v prinyatii resheniy o publikacii statey;
• dostupnost' i operativnost' v obschenii s avtorami;
• strogoe soblyudenie avtorskih prav i redakcionnoy etiki;
• strogoe soblyudenie grafika vyhoda izdaniya.

Predstavlennye dlya publikacii avtorskie materialy dolzhny sootvetstvovat' sleduyuschim trebovaniyam: aktual'nost' temy, nauchnaya novizna issledovaniya, original'nost' issledovatel'skoy problemy i primenennyh metodov issledovaniya, vysokaya nauchnaya i prakticheskaya znachimost' poluchennyh rezul'tatov. Prinimayutsya k opublikovaniyu stat'i na russkom i angliyskom yazykah.

Postupayuschie v izdanie materialy prohodyat pervichnyy otbor na sootvetstvie zayavlennym nauchnym napravleniyam izdaniya, obschim soderzhatel'nym trebovaniyam i trebovaniyam k oformleniyu bibliograficheskih ssylok. V sluchae prohozhdeniya pervichnogo otbora napravlyayutsya na recenzirovanie.

Posle zaversheniya recenzirovaniya avtoru napravlyaetsya pis'mennyy tekst recenzii i ekzemplyar rukopisi s zamechaniyami recenzenta i nauchnogo redaktora dlya dorabotki.

Redakciya vprave otkazat' v publikacii stat'i na osnovanii rezul'tatov recenzirovaniya, nesootvetstviya materiala stat'i tematike izdaniya, a takzhe pri neudovletvoritel'nom kachestve oformleniya predstavlennyh materialov.

Redakciya beret na sebya otvetstvennost' za podgotovku stat'i k publikacii, obespechenie dobrosovestnogo recenzirovaniya, no ne neset otvetstvennost' za dostovernost' privodimyh avtorami konkretnyh dannyh i korrektnost' citirovaniya.

Reshenie o publikacii ili otklonenii postupayuschih v izdanie materialov prinimaetsya redakciey v sootvetstvii s Deklaraciey etiki nauchnyh publikaciy.

Priem statey dlya publikacii v izdanii osuschestvlyaetsya v postoyannom rezhime. Redakciya samostoyatel'no prinimaet reshenie o poryadke i srokah opublikovaniya statey, ishodya iz ih nauchnoy znachimosti, tematiki kazhdogo vypuska, kachestva predvaritel'noy podgotovki rukopisey.

Yazyki izdaniya - russkiy i angliyskiy.

Kategoriya 12+.

Licenzionnyy dogovor №124-03/2019 ot 27 marta 2019 goda  «O vklyuchenii izdaniya «Avtomatizaciya i modelirovanie v proektirovanii i upravlenii» v sistemu Rossiyskogo indeksa nauchnogo citirovaniya».

Bryanskiy gosudarstvennyy tehnicheskiy universitet  v fevrale 2018 poluchil cobstvennyy prefiks DOI i teper' v registracionnomi agentstve Crossref figuriruet kak samostoyatel'nyy izdatel' (Bryansk State Technical University).

4. Regulations for submission, review and publication scientific papers in scientific and technical journal “Automation and Modeling in Design and Management”                                                                               

1. To the publication should be accepted scientific and scientific-engineering papers showing the results of investigations carried out by an author (authors), scientific reviews, proceedings of scientific activities (symposiums, conferences, seminars and so on) which must correspond to journal themes.

2. The authors should present original works containing reliable results of the scientific work done. When using a text or graphic documentation borrowed from the works of other persons the essential references to the corresponding publication are to be carried out. If manuscript elements are already published elsewhere earlier, then the authors must refer to an earlier work having pointed out a difference of the new work from the previous ones.

3. Paper submissions to more than one journal are unacceptable and considered to be author’s unethical behavior.

4. For paper publication in the journal the following should be submitted either to the editorial board in an electronic way (aim-pu@mail.ru), or at the registration at the electronic editorial board of the journal on the site (https://bstu.editorum.ru/ru/nauka/journal/93/view):   

* Text of the paper with signatures of all authors (file with extension .pdf);

* Text of the paper (file with extension.doc or docx carried out in Word text editor; version Word-2007);

* Peer-review conclusions on a possibility of the paper material publication in open publication (file with extension.pdf);

* Written recommendations of a scientific adviser (for post graduate students, Master degree competitors and students without co-authors) (file with extension.pdf);

* Package of pictures and illustrations (besides those inserted into a text) (each Figure should be a single tiff, pdf, jpg with the extension not less than 300 dpi).

* List of captions to the Figures and Illustrations;

A paper text should be read by the author.

5. All reviewers are recognized peer-reviewers for the material under reviewing and in the course of three years past have their publications on the themes of the paper under reviewing. As peer-reviewers may be recruited the journal editorial board member possessing professional knowledge and experience of the work in the scientific direction close to the theme of the author’s manuscript. The peer-reviewers’ recommendations are a reason for decision-making regarding a paper publication. Experts working in the same company where an author (authors) of the paper works should not be peer-reviewers. A review term should not exceed 25 days from the date of the paper submission to the editorial board of the journal. In the presence of the recommendation to update the paper or in case of the rejection to publish a copy of the review should be sent to the author. The paper reviews are kept at the editorial board in the course of 5 years.

6. Names of files submitted to the editorial board should begin with the name and initials of the first author (for instance, I.I. Ivanov, paper.docx, I.I. Ivanov_conclusion.pdf, I.I. Ivanov_Fig_1.jpg).

7. Paper volume – 5-10 pages A4 (mode of an automatic hyphenation) including diagrams, figures, tables, references and an abstract.

8. Manuscript should be single-spaced and contain:

* In the upper left-hand corner - UDC (letter height - 12 pt);

* To the right – initials, author’s (authors’) name separated by a comma (letter height -12 pt);

* Paper title (capital letter height – 14 pt, bold font, center located);

* Abstract (4 – 6 lines; letter height – 10 pt; indentation – 7 mm);

* Key words (6-8 words; letter height – 10 pt; indentation – 7 mm);

* Paper text (letter height – 12 pt; indention – 10 mm; margins: left, right, top and bottom – 20mm);

* References (letter height – 10 pt, heading – capital letters);

* Authors’ data: surname, name, patronymic (in full), academic degree, academic status, position, place of work, office phone, home phone, e-mail, (letter height – 10 pt, heading – capital letters, aligned right);

* Abstract in English and Russian (letter height – 10 pt; indentation – 7 mm).

Reference to grants and information on financial support of investigations carried out by the authors should be located at the end of the paper text (after section “Conclusion”).

9. The paper title of should be informative, reflecting clearly its content in a few words (mainly key ones). An abstract should give a possibility to define a basic content of the paper, identify its relevance, whether a reader should take notice of a full text of the paper (one of the options to form an abstract consists in a brief repetition of the paper structure including purposes, objects, methods and results). An abstract should be translated into English and has for an object to inform a foreign reader about the content of the paper. It should be informative (without general words), original (without duplicating results obtained and published earlier), meaningful (showing a purpose, methods, a procedure of the investigation carried out, results, brief conclusions on the work), structured (following a logic of the paper result description) and compact (15 – 20 lines).

10. The paper text should be structured. An introduction should contain an abstract account of a problem definition and a possible application of results in practice. A basic part should have some inner subdivisions (with subheadings) and contain a formalized problem definition and an offered method for its solution, a difference of the problem definition offered from those already known; an advantage of the method developed in comparison with existing ones (having an example confirming working capacity and efficiency of the solution offered). The paper should be completed with a substantial discussion (conclusion) of the results obtained.

11. Formulae, lettings (uppercase and lowercase letters of the Latin and Greek alphabets), numerals, symbols are supposed to be clear and detectable. All Latin and Greek lowercase letters should be set up in italics, all Russian and Greek uppercase ones - upright. Formulae should be typed in the formula editor of Microsoft Equation or MathType with size 12 pt.

12. Figures, diagrams, schemes, tables and other graphical materials are to be placed within a text (after their first reference) and should have captions (letter height – 10 pt, center aligned), and tables should have headings. A picture flow format is “round a frame”. In the pictures all inscriptions should be written upright with the uppercase letter, font: Times New Roman, letter height - 10 pt.

13. References should be compiled according to RSS (GOST) 7.0.5 - 2008 “Bibliographic Notation. General Requirements and Rules for Formation” and should not exceed 10 names of publications issued not earlier than in 1970.

14. Measure units of all physical values are to be in SI units.

15. The Editorial Board carries out the examination of the completeness of the documentation submitted (in accordance with Article 4), analyzes a text of the paper to identify borrowings with the use of the “Anti-plagiarism” system and reviews papers using criteria of topicality, scientific novelty, information value, correspondence to scientific-technical directions of the journal. 

16.  If according to the recommendation of the Editorial Council the paper is sent back for rework (up to 7 work days), then a date of the revised text submission is pointed out in the journal.

17. The authors do not receive fees.

18. The papers which do not correspond to the scope of the scientific-technical journal and do not meet the present requirements and also submitted with the completeness violations are not accepted for the peer-review. Manuscripts are not sent back. The Editorial Board is not bound to review all materials submitted and does not lead discussions with the authors of papers rejected.

In its activities the Editorial Board of the electronic journal “Automation and Modeling in Design and Management” follows the Law No. 2121-1 “On Mass Media” (Ed. on July 3, 2016)  of  December 27, 1991 of the Russian Federation, Regulations “On the Journal “Automation and Modeling in Design and Management”, and also the recommendations and standards of the Committee on Ethics      of Scientific Publications (COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors,http://publicationethics.org/).

The Editorial Board of the Journal does its best to comply with ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community, analyses and takes into account valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers.

The Declaration of Scientific Publication Ethics reveals general principles and regulations on the relationships of participants in scientific publication procedures (authors, peer-readers, editors, publishers).

EDITORIAL BOARD OBLIGATIONS

Manuscript Assessment

Papers submitted for the consideration must contain results obtained by the authors which were not published elsewhere.  

The review procedure of papers received by the Editorial Board of the Journal is directed to ensuring quality of scientific papers published in the Journal. All papers submitted to the Editorial Board for publication are to be subjected to all stages of review.  

A scientific paper undergoes a procedure of the review twice: an inner peer review is to be carried out by peer readers of the Journal Editorial Council; an external peer review is to be carried out by peer readers pronouncing independently their opinion regarding the level and definition of the presentation of the material presented its correspondence to the Journal scope, novelty and reliability of results. Peer readers’ recommendations are a reason for decision-making regarding paper publication. A paper may be rejected both at the stage of the inner peer review and at the stage of the external one.

The responsibility regarding decision-making for publication is completely in the competence of the Journal Editorial Board.  

The Editorial Board of the Journal makes a decision on publication following Journal policy, taking into account a current legislation in the field of the copyright assessing manuscripts solely according to their scientific content. In case of the Editorial Board and peer readers’ positive decision-making a paper is to be published in the next issue of the Journal at that the authors’ rights are reserved.

In case of publication refusal a motivated response is sent to the author. A manuscript of the paper rejected is being kept at the Editorial Board at least a year. A paper review should be sent to the author without a peer reader’s name and a term in the course of which the author may right back to the review. At the author’s motivated substantiation of the paper material a repeated peer review is carried out and a publication problem is solved.

Confidentiality

The editor and the Editorial Board staff have no right:

• To disclose information regarding papers submitted except corresponding authors, peer readers, other editorial advisers and, in case of need, a publisher;
•           To use in any way the unpublished material used in the manuscript presented without author’s consent.

Interests conflict and ethical conflicts resolution

In case of the interests conflict arisen caused by competitive relationships, a cooperation or other relationships and ties with one of the authors, companies or offices connected with the manuscripts submitted for consideration the Editor forwards the manuscript for consideration to other members of the Editorial Board or the Editorial Council. At filing an ethical complaint regarding a manuscript submitted or a paper published the Editor should undertake adequate measures jointly with the publisher. Each message on a fact of unethical action is to be considered, even if it is obtained years later after a paper publication. If a complaint is supported by the Editorial Board or by the Editorial Council of the Journal, then follows a publication of corresponding corrections, refutations or apologies.       

Storage and review provision

In accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation the reviews of scientific papers are kept at the Editorial Board of the Journal in the course of at least 5 years and may be submitted to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation when requested.

At the rejection of a paper for publication a paper review having reasons to decline publication is to be sent to the authors.  

PEER READERS’ OBLIGATIONS

Contribution to editorial decisions

A peer review of the peer reader promotes editorial decision-making and also contributes to the quality improvement of the paper to be published by means of the Editor and author cooperation.

When discussing an author’s response to the peer review a peer reader has the right to take part in debates.

Efficiency

A peer reader should inform the Editor and refuse to analyze a paper by virtue of an insufficient own competence for the analysis of the investigation presented in the paper and also because of a high workload which may cause problems in the efficiency of peer review preparation.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript submitted for the peer review should be considered as a confidential document. It is unacceptable to show it to other peer readers or discuss it with other experts without a preliminary permission of the Editor-in-Chief.

Impartiality standards

Peer readers must express their opinion clearly and substantiated: reviews of scientific works must be impartial and should not contain personal criticism of the author.

Sources confirmation

Peer readers must:

• Analyze sources used by the author and also reference identification quality of citations used in the paper;
• Reveal materials published in the manuscript under peer review which are quoted, but are not identified bibliographically by the author;
• Draw editor’s attention to a significant or partial similarity with any other work which is directly familiar to the peer reader.

Information disclosure and interests conflict

Confidential classified information or ideas which a peer reader familiarized himself with in the course of peer reviewing must be confidential and should not be used by the peer reader for the personal gain or transfer to the third parties. Peer readers should not be enlisted by the Editorial Board in the participation of the analysis and assessment of manuscripts in which the peer readers have their own interest. The unpublished material used in the manuscript submitted for the peer review to the Editorial Board should not be used by a peer reader in the own investigations without an author’s written consent. 

AUTHORS’ OBLIGATIONS

Reporting standards

Authors are to provide reliable results of the work done they should assess impartially the importance of the investigation carried out by them. Data found upon the investigations should be stated clearly in the paper which must contain sufficient information to check up and repeat experiments by other researchers. Before a paper transfer to the Editorial Board for the analysis the authors must obtain permission in the form of an expert conclusion of the office, where the authors work for the application of the paper content.    

The authors may place in the paper the information regarding financial support of the investigation the results of which are shown in it.

Data access and data storage

Authors may be requested to present initial data for the editorial analysis. They must be ready to provide a free access to such data, if it is required in the course of reasonable time past after their publication.

Singularity and plagiarism

Authors must provide only original works. When using text or graphic information obtained from other persons’ works references are essential to the corresponding publications or an author’s written permission.  In the course of the review of works presented by authors the Editorial Board checks up these works for plagiarism.

Multiple, repeated and competitive publications

Authors should point out in the abstract of the paper that their work is published for the first time. If parts of the manuscript are published in other paper, then the authors must make a reference to an earlier work and point out a significant difference of a new work from the previous one. A verbatim copying of own works and their paraphrasing are unacceptable they may be used only as a basis for new conclusions.

The paper submission simultaneously to several journals is considered to be an unethical action and unacceptable.

Sources confirmation

Authors must recognize a contribution of other persons influencing a character of the investigation carried out. References to the works used are essential. Information obtained from the third parties in private must not be used in the manuscript without their written permission for its use in the paper.

Paper authorship

The authors’ list must be limited with those, who made a significant contribution to the investigations, procedure and results of which are described in the paper. All persons, who made a considerable contribution to paper preparation, must be mentioned as co-authors. A paper may contain information of the participants of an investigation project. An author must ensure that the names of all co-authors and participants of the project are included in the lists of co-authors and participants and all co-authors permitted its publication being familiarized personally with the final version of the scientific work and having it approved.

The participants of the investigation project on material of which there was carried out a scientific paper and who had not been included into the list of paper co-authors should be mentioned in a separate reference after “Conclusion” section.  

Quality of the matter submitted

A paper must be formed in accordance with the requirements of the Editorial Board of the Journal. Any deviation from the requirements mentioned is allowed only in accordance with the agreement with the Editorial Board.

The information presented regarding the authors must be authentic. In case of any data changes the authors must inform of this fact the Editorial Board.

Significant errors in works published

If an author reveals a significant error or inaccuracy in his paper published, he must inform about this case immediately the Editor or the Publisher of the Journal and provide them assistance to eliminate or correct errors revealed.

If the Editor or the Publisher comes to know from the third party or from publications of other authors that a paper, published in the Journal, has significant errors, then the author must eliminate or correct them immediately, or present to the Editorial Board evidences of initial paper correctness. If the fact of significant error presence in the paper published is confirmed, then the Editorial Board must publish information regarding this case.

1. Inclusion into the editorial database the documentation package for scientific work publication sent from the authors to the Editorial Board e-mail or the electronic Editorial Board of the journal (on site).
2. Check-up of the material completeness presented by authors for scientific paper publication.
3. Manuscript check-up for borrowing presence with the use of “Anti-plagiarism” system. At the borrowing permissible level exceeding (more than 20%) follows the notification of authors regarding the necessity of correction the material submitted.
4. Peer review of a scientific paper by the staff of the Editorial Council of the Journal.
5. Maintenance of the paper peer review by the Editorial Council staff of the Journal.  
6. Notification of authors regarding the necessity of paper material improvement (in the presence of peer readers’ recommendations) or the refusal to publish a paper in the Journal (by e-mail).
7. Check-up of the peer readers’ remarks fulfillment (in the presence of remarks) by the authors.
8. Scientific and literary editing the electronic form of papers, essential assistance to authors in the matter of the paper structure improvement, terms choice, figures formation, references correction in accordance with RSS R 7.0.5-2008 “References. General Requirements and Rules of Formation”. 
9. Check-up in accordance with original sources the correctness of citations used and digital data, the application of names and their spelling, scientific-technical terms, measurement units, the correspondence of the symbols used to notations defined by standards or adopted in scientific literature.
10. Paper text agreement by means of e-mail after editing.
11. Technical translation into English of the paper title, author’s name, paper abstract, key words, authors’ data and references.
12. Preparation of the electronic version of the Licensing Agreement between the Editorial Board of the Journal and authors on authors’ data processing, metadata formation of the paper to be published to confer it the identifier of DOI (Digital Object Identifier) with the purpose of the further offer to a user of Internet a possibility to search, review and free use paper materials with the information, scientific and educational purposes (for papers recommended by peer readers for publication).
13. Formation of the printed version of the Licensing Agreement between the Editorial Board of the Journal and authors and its sending by post.
14. Correspondence with paper authors (receipt and recording the Licensing Agreement with authors).
15. Registration of paper authors and paper metadata in ASM (Automated System of Management) with marking them with the identifiers of  ORCID and sending to CrossRef, designation to the scientific publication of the authors the identifiers DOI. The introduction of DOI information in the printed version of the paper.
16. Makeup of the Journal and papers electronic model.
17. Made-up Journal model Proof-reading before printing.
18. Agreement of the Journal model with the Editor-in-Chief.
19. Journal duplication and location on the site of the Journal network version.
20. Journal electronic version Layout in the scientific electronic library (E-library.ru).
21. Journal electronic version layout on the site of the University.  
22. Journal distribution.

RAZMESchENIE REKLAMY V IZDANIYaH

RAZMESchENIE REKLAMY NA SAYTAH IZDANIY

List of retracted articles

Publication fee is not charged.

The journal is planned to be distributed by subscription from 2020.

You can buy the magazine from the publisher.

Contacts:

Anna V. Morozova, head of scientific periodicals Department, Bryansk state technical University; phone: +7-919-202-70-07; e-mail:niotiostu@gmail.com

Periodicity of the journal - quarterly; volume – up to 100 pages.

Averchenkov Andrey Bryansk State Technical University ( kafedra "KTS" , zaveduyuschiy )
doctor of technical sciences
Bryansk , Bryansk , Russian Federation

Averchenkova Elena Bryansk State Technical University ( kafedra «Ekonomika, organizaciya proizvodstva i upravlenie» , docent )
candidate of technical sciences
Bryansk , Bryansk , Russian Federation

Azarchenkov Andrey Bryansk State Technical University ( licensing and accreditatio , Head )
candidate of technical sciences
Bryansk , Bryansk , Russian Federation

Aleshina Sofia University of Bedfordshire ( student )
Moskva , Moscow , Russian Federation

Andreev Vyacheslav Alexeev State Technical University of Nizhny Novgorod ( Dep.”Nuclear Piles and Power Plants” , Professor, Head of the Depatment )
employee
doctor of technical sciences
professor
Nizhniy Novgorod , Nizhny Novgorod , Russian Federation

Anichkin Vasilii Russian New University ( Department of Information Systems in Economics and Management , post graduate student )
Moskva , Moscow , Russian Federation

Apryskin Victor Yuri Gagarin State Technical University of Saratov ( Department «Mathematics and modeling» , Master degree student )
Saratov , Saratov , Russian Federation

Arhangel'skiy Anatoliy Bryansk State Technical University ( Department of Road Transport , ass. prof. )
candidate of technical sciences
docent
Bryansk , Bryansk , Russian Federation

Arshinskiy Vadim National Research Irkutsk State Technical University ( Department of Automated Systems , Assistant Prof. )
candidate of technical sciences
Irkutsk , Irkutsk , Russian Federation

Arshinskiy Leonid Irkutsk State University of Railway Transport ( Department of Information Systems and Information Security , Head )
doctor of technical sciences
Irkutsk , Irkutsk , Russian Federation

Aslanov Gevorg North Caucasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (State Technological University) ( magistr )
Vladikavkaz , Vladikavkaz , Russian Federation

Afanasyev Afanasyev Ulyanovsk State Technical University ( pervyy prorektor )
doctor of technical sciences
Ul'yanovsk , Ulyanovsk , Russian Federation

Bakhvalov Sergey Irkutsk State Technical University ( Department of Automated Systems , Head )
candidate of technical sciences
Irkutsk , Irkutsk , Russian Federation

Belaya Aleksanra Russian New University ( Department of Information Systems in Economics and Management , Master degree student )
Moskva , Moscow , Russian Federation

Berberova Mariya ANO International Nuclear Safety Center ( Researcher )
candidate of technical sciences
Moskva , Moscow , Russian Federation

Berberova Mariya ANO VO “Russian New University”, ANO HE “Russian New University”, ANO “Research Center of Physical and Engineering Informatics” ( Dep. “Information Technologies and Natural Subjects" , Associate Professor, Research assistant, Deputy Director for Science )
candidate of technical sciences
docent
Moskva , Moscow , Russian Federation

Berdyugin Anton Moscow State University of Technology «STANKIN» ( Department "Information technologies and computer systems" , post graduate student )
Moskva , Moscow , Russian Federation

Borisov Stanislav Saint-Petersburg State University of Aerospace Instrumentation ( Department of Innovation and Integrated Quality Systems , Student )
Sankt-Peterburg , St. Petersburg , Russian Federation

Brigadnov Sergey Ulyanovsk State Technical University ( Department of Computer Science , Post graduate student )
Ul'yanovsk , Ulyanovsk , Russian Federation

Vinnichenko Alexandra Saint-Petersburg State University of Aerospace Instrumentation ( Student )
Sankt-Peterburg , St. Petersburg , Russian Federation

• « 
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
•  »

GRNTI