1. The editorial staff ensures an independent and objective review of all submitted articles relevant to the subject of the journal. In order to comply with the principles of objectivity and independence in the evaluation of scientific works, a double-blind review procedure is carried out-anonymous for both reviewers and authors.

  2. After submission to the Editorial board, all articles undergo the procedure of initial review and verification for compliance with the subject and basic requirements of the journal. If the subject matter or editorial requirements are not met, the article shall be rejected without being submitted for review, and the author shall be notified by e-mail.

  3. Articles that have passed the initial review are sent for review to independent reviewers. The reviewers are members of the Editorial Board, as well as invited experts who have published over the past three years on the subject of the reviewed article.

  4. Peer-reviewed articles are considered confidential, prior to its publication. The Editorial board takes measures to prevent conflicts of interest between authors and reviewers. Reviewers are notified that the articles sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and refer to information that is not subject to disclosure. Reviewers are not allowed to use the articles without the consent of the authors. Violation of confidentiality is possible only if it is necessary to make a public statement about unreliability or falsification of the materials presented in the article.

  5. The deadline for a review in each particular case is established in accordance with the reviewer with regard to providing conditions for prompt publication of article.

  6. A review is issued based on the results of the peer review, which contains the following information:
    – relevance of the provided material;
    – availability/absence of scientific novelty of research;
    - consistency of stating goals and problems of the research;
    - completeness of presenting the material;
    - evaluation of work structure and presentation style of the research;
    - field of practical application of the materials described in the article;
    – a well-grounded conclusion on possibility of article publication ("recommended", "recommended with revisions " or "not recommended"), if necessary, recommendations for improving the work are provided.

  7. Upon receipt of the positive reviewer's opinion, the article replenishes the editorial portfolio of the journal until the publication, and the author is notified by e-mail.

  8. If the review contains recommendations for correction and revision of the article, the editorial board sends the review to the author, suggesting that the comments of the reviewers be taken into account or reasoned to refute them in part or in full. The revision of the article shall not take more than two months from the date of sending an e-mail notification to the authors about the need for changes. The revised article is re-submitted for review. This procedure is applied to each article not more than once.

  9. If, after a re-review, the reviewer retains critical remarks to the article, the article is sent for discussion to the members of the editorial board, who decide on its rejection or on the need for further review by a new set of reviewers. This procedure is applied to each article not more than once.

  10. If the article is not recommended for publication after additional review, it is rejected by the editorial board without the right to further revision. This decision is considered final and is sent to the author by e-mail. The editorial board does not enter into discussions with the authors of rejected articles.

  11. In case of refusal to revise the article according to the remarks indicated in the review, the author shall notify the editorial board by e-mail about his refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the article sent for revision after four months from the date of sending the review, the editorial board shall withdraw the article even if the author has not written his refusal to amend it. The authors are sent a notification on dropping the article from publication due to the expiration of the deadline for revision.

  12. The final decision on admitting the article for publication is taken by the editorial board in accordance with the reviewers' recommendations.

  13. Reviews are kept in the Editorial office of the journal for five years from the date of their receipt.