The primary responsibility of the author is to provide an accurate account of the conducted research, the significance of which should be supported, where applicable, by an objective discussion at a meeting of a scientific and technical board.

Authors are responsible for the content of their articles. The research results presented must be reliable.

Authors should cite publications that have had a decisive influence on the work. The use of private information is permitted only with the source’s explicit authorization.

Authors should cite publications that have significantly influenced the work and those that help readers become familiar with earlier studies essential to understand the research. Except for review articles, citations of works not directly related to the submitted article should be minimized. Authors are required to conduct a literature review to identify and cite original publications closely related to the article.

Fragmentation of research reports should be avoided. A researcher conducting extensive studies of a system or group of related systems should organize publications so that each paper presents a complete and coherent account of a specific aspect of the overall research.

When preparing a manuscript for publication, the author shall inform the Editor-in-Chief about any prior publications or manuscripts submitted or accepted for publication. Copies of such manuscripts must be provided, and their relationship to the submitted manuscript must be clearly indicated.

Authors should not submit manuscripts describing essentially the same results to more than one journal as a primary publication, except in cases of resubmission after rejection or withdrawal. Submission of a full article expanding upon a previously published preliminary report is permissible, provided that the Editor-in-Chief is informed and the earlier report is properly cited.

Authors should clearly indicate the sources of all cited or presented information, except for generally known facts. Information obtained privately (through conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties) must not be used without explicit permission. The same applies to information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as peer review or grant evaluation.

Only individuals who have made a significant scientific contribution to the manuscript should be listed as co-authors. The inclusion of fictitious names or the exclusion of actual contributors is prohibited.

In multi-author articles, the corresponding author (who submits the manuscript and communicates with the editors) assumes responsibility for obtaining consent from all co-authors for publication.

Personal criticism of researchers is inappropriate under any circumstances. However, published articles may contain justified criticism of experimental or theoretical work where appropriate.

Authors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including consulting or financial relationships that could be affected by the publication of the results. Authors should ensure the absence of contractual or proprietary constraints that could influence the publication of the submitted work.

Reviewers should provide an objective assessment of the manuscript’s quality and its compliance with high scientific and literary standards, while respecting the intellectual independence of the authors.

If a reviewer feels unqualified to assess the manuscript, they must return it immediately.

Reviewers should consider potential conflicts of interest, particularly when the manuscript is closely related to their own work. In such cases, they must decline the review and inform the Editorial Board.

If a reviewer suspects the identity of the author or the co-author and cannot provide an unbiased assessment of the manuscript, they must discontinue the review and inform the secretary of the journal.

Reviewers should clearly justify and substantiate their evaluations so that the editors and the authors understand the basis of their comments. Any claim that findings have been previously published must be supported by appropriate references.

Reviewers should note any cases of under-citation of other authors’ work that are directly relevant to the work being reviewed; however, it should be noted that comments about under-citation of the reviewer’s own research may appear biased. Reviewers should draw the Editor-in-Chief’s attention to any substantial similarity between the manuscript and any published article or any manuscript submitted simultaneously to another journal.

Reviews must be submitted on time.

Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in the manuscript without the author’s consent. However, if such information indicates that some of the reviewer’s own research may be invalid, discontinuing such work by the reviewer does not violate ethical standards.

The seriousness of an accusation of plagiarism requires the reviewer to provide adequate and reasoned justification for their remarks. Any claim of plagiarism or improper citation must be accompanied by an appropriate reference (the reviewer’s conclusions must not be unfounded or discredit the author without serious grounds for doing so).

If reviewers have doubts regarding plagiarism, authorship, or data falsification, they should request a collective review by the Editorial Board.

Since reviewers are expected to note any instances where the authors have insufficiently cited the work of other scholars in the field of the reviewed article, comments regarding insufficient citation of the reviewer’s own research are identified as biased.

Maintaining the publication schedule requires reviewers to adhere to high standards of discipline, including the timely submission of reviews and respectful communication with authors. In cases of inappropriate behavior towards authors, consistently poor-quality reviews, or repeated delays, cooperation with such reviewers will be terminated.

A conflict of interest is a contradiction between a person’s interests, whether property-related or non-property-related, and their professional or official duties, which may affect the objectivity of their decisions. Such a conflict arises when a private interest (property-related or non-property-related) may influence the objectivity or impartiality of decision-making, or affect the actions or omissions of members of the Editorial Board, authors, editors, reviewers, or others in the exercise of their respective responsibilities.

The main types of conflicts of interest include a potential conflict of interest, when a private interest exists but has not yet influenced a decision, though it may do so in the future, and an actual conflict of interest, when the conflict already affects objectivity or an action. Conflicts of interest may be financial (economic, such as receiving grants, payment for consultations, honoraria, authorship of patents, etc.), ideological (non-financial, related to personal beliefs, academic rivalry, intellectual interests, political or religious views, etc.), or personal (non-financial, related to friendship, family ties, personal relationships, competition, etc.).

Members of the Editorial Board, authors, reviewers, and editors are required to disclose in writing to the Editorial Board management all financial and non-financial conflicts of interest when submitting a manuscript. These individuals are personally responsible for not disclosing any possible financial or personal relationships (if any) that may cause or appear to cause bias in their work.

The Editor-in-Chief reviews declared conflicts of interest, and a corresponding statement is published with the article.

Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, joint, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript (if they have established this fact based on the text of the manuscript). Reviewers must notify the Editorial Board in writing of any existing conflicts of interest.

Reviewers must remain objective and constructive, disclose all potential conflicts, consult the Editorial Office when necessary, and ensure that national, religious, or political considerations do not influence their evaluations.

All conflict-of-interest statements submitted by authors, reviewers, or editors are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and/or the Deputy Editor-in-Chief.

If a conflict of interest involving the Editor-in-Chief(s) is identified, it is reviewed by a committee of three Editorial Board members without conflicts of interest. The committee issues a written decision regarding the Editor-in-Chief’s participation in further editorial processes and may propose measures to eliminate the conflict.

Information contained in submitted manuscripts should not be used by the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board members in their own work without the author’s written permission.

The Editor-in-Chief should recuse themselves from the review process in cases of conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration, or other relationships with authors, institutions, or organizations related to the manuscript. Additionally, they should notify the Editorial Board in writing before submitting the materials for publication in the Collection.

All authors of the Collection must provide the Editor-in-Chief with information about relevant competing interests and publish corrections if a conflict of interest is identified after publication.