Aim and Scope

The aim of the journal is to publish and disseminate research results of leading scientists in many areas of modern mathematics, some areas of physics and computer science.

Section Policies

Article

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Mathematics - К публикации принимаются научно-теоретические статьи по всем разделам математики

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Сomputer science

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Краткие сообщения

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Physics

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Сonference proceedings

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Memorable dates

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Anniversaries

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Memory lane

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Publication Frequency

4 выпуска в год

Open Access Policy

“Chebyshevskii Sbornik” is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.

Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.

For more information please read BOAI statement.

Archiving

• Russian State Library (RSL)
• National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)

Peer-Review

All the scientific articles arrived to the Editorial Board office of the journal "Chebyshevskii sbornik" are undergoing obligatory single blind reviewing (the reviewer knows author(s) of a manuscript, the author(s) of a manuscript do(es) not know reviewers).

1. Reviewing of articles is carried out by members of the Editorial Board, as well as by invited reviewers, the leading experts in a respective branch of mathematics, informatics, and physics in Russia and other countries. A chief editor, the deputy chief editor, or the executive secretary takes the decision about the choice of one or another reviewer for conducting of article expert examination. The reviewing term is 2-4 weeks, but it can be extended at a reviewer's request.

2. Each reviewer has the right to refuse to review in case of presence of an obvious conflict of interests affecting perception and interpretation of materials of a manuscript. Based on the results of manuscript consideration, the reviewer makes recommendations on the article's future (each reviewer's decision is being substantiated):

   • The article is recommended to be published as it is;

   • The article is recommended to be published after the revision according to remarks and recommendation made by a reviewer;

   • The article requires additional reviewing by another expert;

   • The article cannot be published in the journal.

3. If a review contains recommendations on an article's correction and revision, the Editorial Board of the journal directs to the author a text of a review to consider them when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them (partly or completely) in a well-argued manner. Revision of the article must not take more than 2 months after the moment of sending an electronic message to the author(s) about the need to make changes. The article revised by the author(s) is being again submitted to reviewing.

4. In case of a refusal of authors to revise materials, in a written or oral form, they must notify the Editorial Board of their refusal to publish their article. If the authors do not return a revised version 3 months after the day of a review sending, even in case of the absence of information from authors with a refusal to revise their article, the Editorial Board removes the publication from the register. In such situations a respective notice on registration removal of a manuscript in a connection with the expiration of the term allocated for refinement is directed to the authors.

5. If the author and reviewers had insoluble contradictions concerning the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to submit the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, Chief Editor makes the decision at the meeting of the Editorial Board.

6. The decision to refuse the publication of a manuscript is accepted at the meeting of the Editorial Board in accordance with recommendations of reviewers. The article which is not recommended by a decision of the Editorial Board for publication is not accepted for repeat consideration. The message on the refusal of publication is being directed to the author by email.

7. After decision-making by the Editorial Board of the journal on the authorization of an article for publication, the Editorial office informs the author about the fact and indicates terms of publication.

8. Positive review is not the reasonable ground for publication of an article. The final decision on the publication is taken by the Editorial Board. In conflict situations, Chief Editor makes the decision.

9. The original versions of reviews have been being guarded in the Editorial office of the journal for 3 years.

Indexation

The publications in the "Chebyshevskii sbornik" journal belong to systems of calculations of citation indexes of authors and journals. "Citation index" is a numerical exponent characterizing significance of the current article and being calculated on the basis of the subsequent publications referring to the paper.

The journal is indexed in the systems:

• Russian Science Citation Index is a bibliographic and abstract index implemented in the form of a database accumulating information on publications of Russian scientists in Russian and foreign scientific periodicals. The RSCI project has been being developed since 2005 by the "Scientific electronic library" company (elibrary.ru). More than 2400 domestic journals are placed in elibrary platform by 2012.

• MathSciNet® is an electronic database (electronic version of Mathematical Reviews®), holding abstracts of books and articles on all mathematics sections and its attachments in informatics, mechanics, and physics.

• Zentralblatt MATH is anelectronic database of the Springer press.

• Google Scholar is the free and open search system which indexes a full text of scientific publications of all formats and disciplines. Google Scholar index includes the majority of reviewed European and American online journals of the largest scientific publishing houses.

• Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI)is theRussiancollection Web of Science.

The journal is reviewed by:

• Mathematical Reviews® is an abstract mathematical journal published by the American mathematical society since 1940.

• The AJ "Mathematics" of VINITI RAS is anabstract mathematical journal published by the All-Russian scientific and technical information institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences (VINITI RAS)

Publishing Ethics

Introduction

1.1. Publication of materials in reviewed journals is not only a simple way of scientific communications but also makes significant contribution to development of the respective field of scientific knowledge. Thus it becomes important to set the standards of future ethical behaviour of all the parties involved in publication, in particular: for Authors, Editors of the journal, Reviewers, Publishing house, and Scientific society for the journal "Chebyshevskii sbornik"

1.2. The publisher not only supports scientific communications and invests in this process but is also bearing responsibility for observance of all current recommendations in a publishing paper.

1.3. The publisher is undertaking obligations based on the strictest supervision of scientific materials. Our journal programs present an impartial «report» on development of scientific thought and studies, therefore we also realize responsibility for due submission of these «reports», especially in terms of ethical aspects of publications set forth in this document.

2. Responsibilities of the Editors

2.1. Decision on publication

The Editor of the scientific journal "Chebyshevskii sbornik" is personally and independently bearing responsibility for decision-making on publication often in with the respective Scientific society. Veracity of a considered paper and its scientific significance should always underlie a decision about publication. The Editor can be guided by policy of the Editorial Board of the journal "Chebyshevskii sbornik", being limited by relevant legal requirements with respect to denigration, a copyright, law, and piracy.

The Editor can consult with other Editors and Reviewers (or Scientific society officials) during decision-making about publication.

2.2. Morality

The Editor must estimate intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship, or political preferences of the Authors.

2.3. Confidentiality

The Editor and the Editorial Board of "Chebyshevskii sbornik" journal are obliged not to reveal without necessity information about the accepted manuscript to all the persons with an exception of the Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other scientific consultants, and the Publisher.

2.4. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interests

2.4.1 Unpublished data received from manuscripts proposed for consideration cannot be used in personal studies without the Author's written agreement. Information or the ideas received in the course of review process and related to possible advantages must be kept confidential and not be used for the purpose of receipt of personal advantage.

2.4.2 Editors must take self-recusation from consideration of manuscripts (namely: to demand for a Co-editor, an Editor's Assistant or to cooperate with other members of the Editorial Board during consideration of work instead of personal review and decision-making) in case of conflicts of interests in consequence of competitive, joint and other interactions and relationships with the Authors, companies, and, perhaps, with other organizations related to a manuscript.

2.5. Publication supervision

The Editor who provided convincing evidence of the fact that the assertions or the conclusions presented in a publication are erroneous must report the Publisher (and/or to the respective Scientific society) about it for the purpose of the shortest notification about making of changes, an publication exception, expression of concern, and other statements corresponding to a situation.

2.6. Involvement and cooperation in the framework of research

The editor together with the Publisher (or the Scientific society) takes adequate retaliatory measures in a case of ethical complaints relating to addressed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures in common features include interaction with

Authors of a manuscript and argumentation for a respective complaint or the requirement but they can also mean interactions with respective organizations and research centres.

3. Responsibilities of the Reviewers

3.1. Influence on decisions of the Editorial Board

Reviewing helps the Editor to make a decision on the publication and by means of respective interaction with the Authors can also help the Author to improve the quality of work. Reviewing is a necessary link in formal scientific communication found in the very «heart» of a scientific approach. The publisher shares an opinion about the fact that all the scientists who want to make contribution to publication are obliged to execute significant work of a manuscript being reviewed.

3.2. Diligence

Any selected Reviewer feeling not enough qualification for consideration of a manuscript or not having enough time for fast implementation of the work must notify the Editor of the "Chebyshevskii sbornik" journal and ask to exclude him/her from the process of a respective manuscript being reviewed.

3.3. Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be regarded as a confidential document. This work may not be discovered and discussed with anybody not having authorities for that from the Editor.

3.4. Requirements for a manuscript and objectivity

The reviewer is obliged to give objective assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. The reviewers should express their opinion clearly and in a well-argued manner.

3.5. Recognition of original sources

The Reviewers are to discover significant published works corresponding to a topic and not included in a bibliography to a manuscript. There should be a corresponding bibliographic link in the manuscript to any statement published previously. The reviewer should also pay the Editor's attention towards detection of a significant similarity or coincidence between an addressed manuscript and any other published work found in sphere of scientific competence of the Reviewer.

3.6. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interests

3.6.1 Unpublished data received from manuscripts proposed for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the Author's written agreement. Information or the ideas received in the course of review process and related to possible advantages must be kept confidential and not be used for the purpose of receipt of personal advantage.

3.6.2. The reviewers must not participate in consideration of manuscripts in case of presence of conflicts of interests in consequence of competitive, joint and other interactions and relationship with any of the Authors, companies, or other organizations related to a presented work.

4. The responsibilities of the Authors

4.1. Requirements for manuscripts

4.1.1 Authors of works about original scientific research should provide veracious results of a done work as well as objective discussion of significance of a study. Data underlying a work must be presented correctly. The work must contain enough evidence, reasoning, and bibliographic links for possible reproduction. False or obviously erroneous statements are taken as unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. The reviews and the biographical articles must also be accurate and objective, the opinion they are owing to the Editorial Office is clearly denoted.

4.2. Data access and its storage

The unprocessed data related to a manuscript for being reviewed by the Editors can be demanded at the Authors.

4.3. Originality and piracy

4.3.1 Authors should make sure that a completely original work is presented and in a case the usage of works or statements of other Authors must provide corresponding bibliographic links or extracts.

4.3.2 Piracy can exist in many forms, from a presentation of other's work as author's one to copying or paraphrase of significant parts of other's works (without indication of authorship) even to proclaiming of the own rights for the results of other's studies. Piracy in all forms represents unethical actions and is unacceptable.

4.4. Multiplicity, redundancy, and simultaneity of publications

4.4.1 In a general case the Author should not publish a manuscript for the most part devoted to one and the same study in more than one journal as an original publication. Submission of one and the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal is being taken as unethical behaviour and it is unacceptable.

4.4.2. In a general case the Author should not present a previously published article for consideration to the other journal.

4.4.3. The publication of a specific type of articles (for example, clinical recommendations, and translated articles) in more than one journal is ethical in some cases during observance of certain conditions. The Authors and the Editors of interested journals should agree to a secondary publication necessarily presenting the same data and interpretations as in a work of work's primary being published.

The bibliography of a primary work must be introduced even in the second publication.

4.5. Recognition of original sources

Contribution of other people must always be recognized. The authors must refer to the publications which make a difference for accomplishment of a presented work. Data received unofficially, for example, in the course of a conversation, correspondence, or in the process of discussion with the third parties should not be used or submitted without a clear written original source authorization. Information received from confidential sources such as assessment of manuscripts or provision of grants should not be used without a clear written authorization of the Authors of a work related to confidential sources.

4.6. Authorship of a publication

4.6.1 Only those who made significant contribution to formation of an idea of a work, development, fulfilment, or interpretation of a submitted study can be the Authors of a publication. All those ones who made significant contribution must be marked as the Co-authors.

4.6.2. The Author must be convinced that all the participants who have made substantial contribution to a study are introduced as the Co-authors and those who have not participated in a study are not led as the Co-authors, all the Co-authors have seen and a final version of paper have approved and they have agreed with a proposal of it for publication.

4.7. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interests

4.7.1 All the Authors are obliged to reveal in their manuscripts financial or other existing conflicts of interests which can be perceived as having impact on results or conclusions presented in a paper.

4.7.2 Examples of potential conflicts of interests which are necessarily subjected to disclosure include work for hire, counselling, presence of equity property, receipt of fees, provision of expertise, a patent request, or registration of a patent, grants, and other financial security. The potential conflicts of interests must be revealed as early as possible.

4.8. Significant mistakes in published papers

Founder

Author fees

Publication in the journal is free for the authors.

The Editorial Office does not collect charge from Authors for preparation, placement, and printing of materials.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished data received from manuscripts proposed for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the Author's written agreement.
Information or the ideas received in the course of review and related to possible advantages must be kept confidential and not be used for the purpose of receipt of personal advantage.

The reviewers must not participate in consideration of manuscripts in case of presence of conflicts of interests in consequence of competitive, joint and other interactions and relationship with any of the Authors, companies, or other organizations related to a presented work.

Plagiarism detection

The Editorial Board of the "Chebyshevskii sbornik" journal can make a check of material during consideration of an article with help of the system Antiplagiat. In case of detection of numerous borrowings, the Editorial office acts in accordance with the rules of COPE.

Preprint and postprint Policy

During submission of an article the author needs to confirm that the article has not been published or accepted for publication in another science journal. In case of reference to anarticle published in the "Chebyshevskii sbornik" journal, the Publishing house asks to place a link (the full material URL) to an official website of the journal.

Articles, which have been placed previously by authors on personal sites or public sites and which does not belong to other publishing houses, are admitted to consideration.