The editors of the “Izvestia Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zawedeniy. Yadernaya Energetika” Journal adhere to the international publication ethics principles, including accountability, fairness, confidentiality, disclosure policy, consideration of possible conflicts of interests, etc. The editorial board follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics and draws on the valuable experience of the world’s leading academic publishers, including the Elsevier requirements for peer-reviewed academic journals in accordance with international publication ethics principles.
Authors reporting results of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Any plagiarism is regarded as unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In accordance with the policy of the Editorial Board, any plagiarism in the manuscript submitted by an author (authors) makes it impossible to publish the author’s (authors’) other papers in the journal.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Authors must inform the editors that their work is published for the first time. If passages of the manuscript have been published previously, the source must be given, and an explanation must be provided of how the submitted publication is different from the previous one. Copying the author’s previous work word for word or paraphrasing it with minor alterations is unacceptable. It can only be used as a basis for further conclusions. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.
Authorship of a manuscript
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
The editors request the authors to adhere to the principles of bioethics if the work involves the use of animal or human subjects.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editor or publisher and cooperate with them to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
The manuscript submitted should contain new nontrivial academic results, published for the first time ever. The manuscripts should be submitted to the Editorial Board after approval by affiliating university departments or Science and Technology Councils of affiliating research institutes and should be accompanied by expert assessments to approve their publication, license agreements and transfer and acceptance certificates for each Author (license agreement and transfer and acceptance certificate forms are downloadable from nuclear-power-engineering.github.io/en/docs). The manuscript should be signed by all authors, which makes possible its print and online publication. Each article should be reviewed. The integrity of the peer-review process is upheld through the use of a single-blind review procedure: the identity of the reviewers is not disclosed to the author. Reviewers can freely make motivated critical comments concerning the level and presentation clarity of the article being reviewed, its relevance to the journal specialization, novelty and reliability of the results represented.
Reviewers’ recommendations are the basis for making a final decision concerning the article publishing. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The responsibility for the article publishing rests with the Editorial Board. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s Editorial Board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
If accepted for publication, the article is placed on open access. The copyright for any material created by the author(s) (including photos, figures, graphics, tables, etc.) is reserved by “News of Higher Educational Institutions. Nuclear Power” and the author(s). The publisher is entitled to use any communication media to disseminate articles, including the press and the Internet. The publisher is entitled to translate articles into any foreign language, to export and import any issues of the journal containing the author’s (authors’) article for dissemination purposes.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a correction or expression of concern. An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. If the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note as may be relevant.
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the author (authors), may also assist the author (authors) in improving the manuscript.
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.