Publication Ethics

In order to ensure the legal and qualitative publication of research results, the journal «Energy Technologies & Resource Saving» declares that it adheres to the below principles in the doing of its activities (developed on the basis of the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics): 

  1. Allegations of misconduct. 

1.1. In the author's agreement on the transfer of copyrights, the stipulated that the author(s) of the articles bear full responsibility for the materials provided, as well as the losses that may be caused to the 3rd party as a result of their publication. 

1.2. The Editorial Board maintains confidentiality of the materials provided before they are released and provides the materials to the peer review experts together with their written warning regarding compliance with the confidentiality policy regarding the materials provided. In case of rejection of the materials of the manuscript, the Editorial Board and peer review experts undertake to destroy them and preserve the confidentiality of the submitted materials indefinitely. 

  1. Authorship and contributorship. 

2.1. In accordance with clause 2 of the peer review process, the article is checked for identity in the program unicheck.com or another program at the discretion of the executive editor, and if the detected of plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) it will be rejected.

2.2. The Editorial Board undertakes to respond to written and electronic appeals (including anonymous ones) concerning the materials of the articles, in particular concerning the conflicts of authorship of the materials provided (with proper documentary substantiation).2.3. In the case of suspicion of falsification of research results, a request may be made to the organization(s) (where the author(s) is/are work) for doing the relevant investigation and/or doing the separate investigation by the Editorial Board on this issue.2.4. All authors of the publication should make a weighty scientific contribution to the article. The inclusion of third parties, technical or other personnel involved in the work, experiments or data processing, but does not have a scientific contribution to publication materials - is prohibited. If the co-authors are found not related to the results presented in the work (for example, such information will be provided by the organization where the research was conducted or as a result of the investigation of commission formed in accordance with clause 3.1), all authors will be entered in the black list of the journal (a ban on the submission of publications for 3 years). 

  1. Complaints and appeals. 

3.1. In the case of an official written accusation by the Editorial Board or author(s) in unlawful action(s) will forme the plenipotentiary commission is established to investigate the facts set out. The commission consists of 6 people, representatives: The Gas Institute of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (the publisher); the Editor-in-Chief; one of the members of the Editorial Board; a representative from National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”; representative from a public organization; a third-party scientist, working in the direction of research, which is set out in the materials of the article.3.2. Recommendations that will be made as a result of the commission investigation clause 3.1. are obligatory for the Editorial Board of the journal, in particular, they may contain the clause regarding the publication of the results of the investigation in the nearest issue of the journal. 

  1. Conflicts of interest/Competing interests. 

4.1. The Editorial Board undertakes to submit the manuscript to peer review experts after investigate of ostend potential conflicts of interest between authors and peer review experts, in particular regarding the availability of compatible publications (there should be no references to articles by the peer review expert). In case of their discovery, the peer review expert is rejected and another candidate is considered.

4.2. Since the anonymous review of material articles does not guarantee the avoidance of conflicts of interest, peer review experts are disclosed after the peer review procedure:

4.2.1. After conducting an anonymous peer review, the Editorial Board via e-mail disclose personal information about of author(s) and peer review experts with the proposal within 10 business days to declare possible conflicts of interest. In the case of the written appeal sent by e-mail of the Editorial Board from author(s) or at least one of the peer review experts regarding the existence of conflicts of interest, a re-peer review of the article is conducted.

4.2.2. In case of rejection of the article by one of the peer review experts (the mark "C" in the place form of the article manuscript review), with the refusal to publish the article, the author(s) receive the contact information about the peer review expert which rejected it. The authors have the right within 10 days from the date of refusal to appeal with the justification of a possible conflict of interest between the author (s) and the peer review experts. The Editorial Board undertakes to consider the appeal within 5 working days from the day of receipt and, following the results of the review, the article may be renewed or a final refusal is given. 

  1. Data and reproducibility. 

The presentation form of the materials described in the article should be understandable for students, teachers and specialists in the field of science and technology, and the research itself should be such that it can be repeated by other researchers. 

  1. Ethical oversight. 

6.1. In the case of an official or anonymous appeal of any person who claims that the results of the research or part of the article belong to him/her, and he/she is not the co-author, publication of the article will be suspended, and to the organization(s) represented by the author(s) will be sent an official request to conduct an internal investigation in the results of which the article may be rejected.

6.2. In the case of an official or anonymous appeal of any person or organization before the publication of the article with critical remarks regarding the used technique, the methodology of the experiment, the processing of data, the proposed theory, method, or other - the Editorial Board increase the number of peer review experts to 4.

6.3. If the appeal in accordance with clauses 6.1, 6.2 received after the publication of the article, a special commission is created by the Editorial Board in accordance with clause 3.1 for conducting an investigation. In case of falsification of data, the Editorial Board act in accordance with clause 2.3. 

  1. Intellectual property. 

The Editorial Board attempts to prevent the publication of materials that may contain plagiarism and copyright infringement in every respect, clause 2 of the peer review process. If a plagiarism or copyright infringement is discovered after the publication of the article, the Editorial Board will act is in accordance with clause 1.1. and clause 3.1. 

  1. Journal management. 

8.1. Publication of articles bypassing queue is prohibited. In accordance with clause 2 of the peer review process, after the peer review process of the article, the authors will be informed of the issue number of the journal in which their publication will be published.

8.2. The number of articles published in a single issue of a journal cannot be more than 20. If the number of publications accepted for printing reaches amount of publications (the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief) for the current issue (but no more than 20), all the others in the order of the queue are carry over to next issue. 

  1. Peer review processes. 

9.1. The procedure for reviewing the manuscript of the article is carried out in accordance with such the peer review process.

9.2. In accordance with clause 4.2. peer review experts are disclosed after the anonymous peer review process and in case of disclosure in the publication of references to the work of the peer review expert, or if desired by the authors of the article, to see the peer review expert as co-author of the publication (with the appropriate written submission of all authors and the peer review expert), the article will be marked as the newly accepted for review and peer review process start again. 

  1. Post-publication discussions and corrections. 

10.1 In the case of errors found in the published article at the official submission of the author(s), he/she/they is/are given the right to correct the erroneous part that may be published in one of the subsequent editions of the journal at the end of it (the decision is taken by the Editorial Board), while on the journal's website to the published article in *.pdf file is added the corrections made (in the end of the article).

10.2 In the event of errors in the published article reveal by other person or organization, in the presence of an official appeal, on the journal's website in the *.pdf file of the article may be published the submitted corrections (at the end of the article; at the Editorial Board discretion; with the approval of the corrections by two peer review experts).