THE ORDER OF PEER REVIEW

For the sake of objectivity, all submitted papers are peer reviewed (double-blind). Peer review is the process of obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from experts in the field. The submitted papers must be ready for blind review and must bear no trace of the author’s identity. Each paper is evaluated by two referees independently. The members of the Editorial Board or outside experts may participate in the review. It is the responsibility of the Editorial Board to select reviewers who have the necessary competence to evaluate the paper. The reviewers assist the Editorial Board in taking the decision of publishing a submitted manuscript. The reviewers are bound to treat the manuscript received for peer reviewing as confidential, and must not use the information obtained through peer review for personal advantage. The reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Papers submitted by a member of the Editorial Board are treated equally with all other papers, i. e. they undergo peer review on the very same basis. All reviewers must be experts in the subject of a submitted paper, must have a degree of at least of Candidate of Sciences (PhD). Reviewing of papers are carried out on a voluntary basis and free of charge. Each referee follows the principles set out in the Statement on ethical standards of publication. Accepted papers are typically published within a year of acceptance.

The review procedure includes the following:

• The initial selection of papers is made by the Editor and the Editorial Board. If submitted paper does not fit both the journal's aims, scope and formal requirements, it will be rejected on this basis.
• A submitted paper is sent to two referees. The reviewing duties may be taken up by members of the Editorial Board or external experts.
• In case there are two positive reviews the paper is accepted, and v.v. in case of two negative reviews the paper is rejected. If there is a disagreement between reviewers, the Editorial Board makes a final decision on the basis of additional internal or external review.
• In case referees decide a submitted paper deserves publication after a significant revision, the author re-submits the revised paper in a contracted time. The revised paper must be accompanied by the author's response to reviewers’ comments in a separate cover letter. The Editorial Board makes a final decision on the publication or rejection of a paper on the basis of how well the author takes into account the comments of reviewers.
• The Editorial Board prides itself on supplying the authors with substantial referee reports.
• The Editorial Board stores reviews for 5 years.