Peer Review
As per the established procedure, all scientific articles received by the journal should be accompanied by a review of a specialist in the subject area of the article. The executive editor of the editorial board determines if the article meets the scope of the journal, presentation requirements, evaluates completeness of the submitted review and sends the article to the editor-in-chief or the deputy editor-in-chief for the first, scientific content review.
The article is further reviewed by a member of the editorial board or an external reviewer who specializes in the area closest to the one that the article pertains to. The review time is determined by the executive editor of the journal on a case by case basis so as to create favourable conditions for the swift publication of the article.
The following items should be commented on in the review submitted with the article and in the additional review by a member of the editorial board or an external reviewer:
a) correspondence of the content of the article to the title; b) correspondence of the content of the article to modern achievements in the area of mechanical engineering theory and practice; c) clarity of the material in terms of the language, style, layout, presentation of the tables, diagrams, pictures and formulae; d) appropriateness of the publication considering the novelty of the material presented in the article; e) correspondence of the material to modern requirements in mechanical engineering; f) recommendations to the author, corrections and additions regarding the material of the article; g) conclusion on the acceptance for publishing after the remarks noted by the reviewer are corrected or a rejection for publishing in the science and technology journal Proceedings of Higher Educational Institutions. Маchine Building.
All the reviews, either submitted by the author or performed on the instruction of the executive editor of the editorial board should be authenticated as per the procedure established at the institution that the reviewer works at.
The review process is anonymous, the name of the reviewer is unknown to the author and the reviewer does not know the name of the author of the article. The author of the article under review is given an opportunity to familiarize himself with the reviewer’s comments.
If the review contains recommendations to correct or improve the article, the executive editor of the journal BMSTU Journal of Mechanical Engineering forwards the reviewer’s comments to the author and invites him to incorporate them into a new version of the article or justify why the comments cannot (partially or fully) be accepted. The revised (re-written) article is sent for the second review.
An article that is not recommended for publishing by the reviewer does not go through the second review. A notification of the negative decision is sent to the author by email or post.
When the decision for publishing is made by the editorial board of the journal BMSTU Journal of Mechanical Engineering, the author is notified and informed about the time of the publication.
The originals of the reviews are kept at the editorial office of the journal BMSTU Journal of Mechanical Engineering for at least 5 years.
Editorial send copies of reviews of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.