Peer-Review process of the journal “Intelligent Systems. Theory and Applications”

1. Reviewing of articles is carried out by invited reviewers, as well as by members of the editorial board.
2. The journal reviews all materials submitted to the editorial office that correspond to its subject matter, with the aim of their expert evaluation. If the received material does not correspond to the declared subject of the journal, the article will not be considered. The editors immediately inform the author.
3. Materials of the authors are published only after receiving a positive review / reviews of the article.
4. Reviewing is one-sided anonymous ("blind") - the author's name is known to the reviewer, the reviewer's name is unknown to the author.
5. The number of reviewers working with one material (article) is not limited.
6. The role of a reviewer can be adopted by all PhDs of the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, as well as by employees of other scientific and educational institutions of the Russian Federation and foreign countries who have sufficient qualifications in the relevant scientific field, have received an academic degree and have authority in the scientific community (including members of the editorial board "Intelligent systems. Theory and applications"). All reviewers are recognized experts on the subject of the peer-reviewed materials and have, over the past 3 years, publications on the subject of the peer-reviewed article.
7. The right to choose a reviewer / reviewers belongs to the editorial board of the journal (editor-in-chief, first deputy editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief, executive secretary). If the reviewer refuses to evaluate the text (including those related to a conflict of interest), the editorial staff selects another expert. The editorial board has the right to appoint additional experts and / or conduct an independent examination.
8. The manuscript is accepted for publication, rejected or returned to the author for revision only by the decision of the editorial board. The decision of the editorial board is final.
9. When evaluating the material, experts use a single electronic form of review, which must indicate one of 4 options for an expert decision: accept (the article can be accepted in the presented form); accept subject to minor changes (the article does not require to be reviewed); accept subject to major changes (the article requires to be reviewed); refuse.
10. If the reviewer indicates the need to make serious changes to the article with re-review, the manuscript is returned to the author for revision without consideration by the editorial board. After revision, the new version of the manuscript is sent for re-review by the same / the same expert who made the corresponding conclusion.
11. Authors are obliged to take into account the comments of the reviewer/reviewers and/or members of the editorial board, making the appropriate corrections to the article. At the request of the reviewer/reviewers, the author can obtain his/her/their contact information to optimize the work on corrections. The time for revising the texts is not limited.
12. Expert decisions “accept”, “accept subject to minor changes” and “accept subject to major changes” are considered positive, expert decision “refuse” is considered negative. In case of receiving positive and negative reviews for one material, the issue is submitted to the meeting of the editorial board, which makes the final decision.
13. If there are two negative reviews of the manuscript from two different reviewers, the article is rejected without submission to the editorial board.
14. In case of rejection of the article, the editorial staff sends a reasoned refusal to the author with a review/reviews attached.
15. Reviews are kept in the publishing house and in the editorial office of the journal for 5 years, their copies are provided upon request to the authors of the manuscripts. The editorial board sends copies of reviews to the Ministry of Higher Education of Russian Federation providing that the inquiry was made.
16. The period for reviewing - between the dates of receipt (version) of the manuscript in the editorial office and the issuance of the decision by the editorial board or the editorial board - is usually at least 1 month.