Paper reviewing

  1. The editorial board of «Resource-Efficient technologies» accepts the papers prepared according to the Guide for authors. The paper is sent to the editorial office by electronic submission system (Send article).
  2. A manuscript is blind reviewed. The reviewers are high-level scientists and experts in the proper field of expertise. The author receives back the article with recommendations for modification or the reasonable rejection of publication.
  3. The editorial staff does not inform the authors about editorial changes and reductions in the manuscript which do not affect the fundamental issues.
  4. If the author does not agree with the reviewer opinion they should provide the motivated respond the paper may be sent for the second (additional) review by agreement with the Editorial Board. The Editor in Chief or the Editorial Board makes a final decision about paper publication after reviewing.

Article production process

  1. The author submits the paper to the journal via the electronic submission system.
  2. The article is formally checked by journal staff against the guide for the authors. This is just checked for formal criteria; there is no quality check at this stage.
  3. An assessment by Editor-in-chief or Managing Editor whether the article appropriate for the journal scope, original and potentially interesting for readers. If not, the paper may be rejected.
  4. The journal Editor is assigned at this stage to handle the article. The editor-in-chief or Managing Editor may handle the article at this stage.
  5. The handling editor invites appropriate reviewers who are the specialists in the field of the article topic. Handling editor may assign as many reviewers as he needs for the final decision but the minimum number is 2. The deadline for review is set by handling editor.
  6. Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers. The deadline for review is set by handling editor.
  7. The reviewers read the paper several times and provide a detailed point-by-point review according to the journal guidelines. The review is submitted to the journal and a recommendation to accept, reject, revision (major or minor) is set.
  8. The handling editor considers all the reviews before an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer to get an extra opinion before making a final decision.
  9. If the article is rejected or sent back for major or minor revision, the handling editor should include detailed comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article.
  10. An email sent to reviewers letting them know the outcome of their review. If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the handling editor.
  11. If the paper accepted, it is sent to production. At this stage, the paper sent to proofreading for language check and typesetting. The proof is then sent back to the authors for the final check. The authors return the corrected final proofs to the journal.
  12. Final check, production and publication of the manuscript at the journal web site.