- » Aims and Scope
- » Journal Sections
- » Publication Frequency
- » Delayed Open Access
- » Archiving
- » Peer Review
- » Indexation
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder/Publisher
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
Aims and Scope
"Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov" ("Zavodskaya Laboratoriya. Diagnostika Materialov") is a monthly peer-reviewed multidisciplinary scientific journal dedicated to the methods of determination of composition, structure and properties of various materials. The journal publishes the original research papers and critical reviews dealing with all aspects of analytical chemistry, investigation of materials composition, mechanics, and mathematical statistics. Original name of the journal from 1932 was "Industrial Laboratory", and was changed to "Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov" in 1995.
The journal contains four main sections.
The section "Substances analysis" is devoted to all stages of analytical cycle, topics to be covered by this section include, but are not limited to: atomic and molecular spectrometry (AES, AAS, MS, X-ray, IR, Raman, NMR, fluorescence), chromatography and electrophoresis, chemical methods of analysis, chemical sensors, biosensors and related technologies, sampling, sample preparation, separation techniques, environmental, clinical, biological and agrochemical applications, instrumentation, surface analysis, and data processing.
The section "Structure and properties investigation" is divided into two sub-sections:
- the sub-section "Physical methods of investigation and monitoring" is dedicated to the investigation of wide range of materials by means of structural (electronic and optical microscopy; X-ray, electron and neutron diffraction, etc.), electro-physical, spectroscopic and resonance methods including nondestructive testing;
- the sub-section "Materials mechanics: strength, durability, safety" is devoted to constructions tests on strength, crack growth resistance, reliability, safety by criteria of short-term and long strength, creep, low-cycle and thermal fatigue, high-cycle fatigue, tribology. Of special concern is analysis of stress-strain states by means of both experimental methods of research (photoelasticity, holography, electronic digital speckle interferometry) and computer simulation techniques.
The section "Mathematical methods of investigation" covers the aspects of applied statistics (including statistics of non-numeric data, regression analysis, classification methods), design of experiments, expert estimation, statistical methods of quality assurance, mathematical modelling and identification of technological, chemical and physical processes on the basis of the theory of fuzzy sets, interval mathematics and statistics.
The section "Compliance verification. Laboratory accreditation"
deals with all metrological aspects of quality assurance in analytical measurements (uncertainty, traceability, uniformity of results, etc.), product certification, development and characterization of reference materials.
"Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov" is intended primarily for specialists working in industrial, agricultural, and environmental laboratories and also for researchers and educators in the field of materials sciences.
English translation of selected articles from «Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov” is published by the journal "Inorganic Materials" (Issues 14-15).
The main aims of the Journal are:
- to broaden the relationship between Russian and foreign scientific communities in the materials science area;
- to ensure the professional dialogue between scientists within the journal scope;
- to keep the readers aware of the most relevant and promising areas of research in the field of diagnostics of materials;
- to involve in publications both authoritative and young Russian and foreign scientists.
Journal Sections
Peer Reviewed Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Publication Frequency
12 issues per year
Delayed Open Access
The contents of this journal will be available in an open access format 24 month(s) after an issue is published.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer Review
The journal follows a single-blind reviewing procedure which implies a reviewer anonymity. The authors of the manuscript receive an acceptance letter or a letter with remarks signed by the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief.
1. Members of the editorial board, members of the profile section and leading Russian and international experts in corresponding areas, invited as independent readers, perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief or science editor choose experts for reviewing. We aim to limit the review process to 4-6 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
2. Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations:
- to accept the manuscript "as is";
- to accept the manuscript for publication after its completion by the author in accordance with the remarks of the reviewer;
- to send the manuscript to another expert for additional reviewing to reach final decision;
- to reject the manuscript outright.
3. Then the article is considered at the meeting of the profile section editorial board, where it is presented by the second reviewer and discussed by all members of the section. A final decision concerning the manuscript publication based on the reviews and opinions of the majority of the section members is made.
4. If the paper needs further elaboration, the editorial board sends the author a text including the comments and suggests the author preparing a new version of the paper. Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 2 months and resubmit the adapted manuscript within this period for final evaluation.
5. We politely request that the editor to be notified verbally or in writing should the author decide to refuse from preparation a new version of the manuscript. In case the author fails to do so within 3 months since receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.
6. If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding the manuscript content, the manuscript can be sent for additional review. In case of conflict situation the editor-in-chief or the profile section of the journal resolves the conflict by his own authority.
7. If the editorial board reaches the decision to reject a manuscript according to reviewers’ recommendations and the decision of the profile section, authors are notified of the refusal to publish via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.
8. If the manuscript is accepted for publication the editorial office informs the author via e-mail.
9. Amanuscript is free from reviewing if an academician (RAS member) or RAS corresponding member is the single author or the first author in the authors team of the manuscript.
10. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 5 years.Indexation
Articles in “Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov" are indexed by several systems:
- Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
- Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
Also indexed in CAS (pt), CAS (core), GeoRef (Core), Dimensions, Ulrich's, Lens etc.
Publishing Ethics
The publication ethics and malpractice statement of the journal “Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov" based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (code of conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org) and the requirements for peer reviewed journals developed by the Elsevier publisher (in accordance with the international ethical rules of scientific publications).
1. Introduction
1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed journal «Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov» serves many purposes. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.
1.2. Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.
1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programs record «the minutes of science» and we recognize our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies and not least in the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1. Publication decision – An editor of the journal "Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov" personally and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often in cooperation with the relevant scientific community. Verification of work and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The editor should follow the journal's policy and relevant legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or scientific experts) at the time of making decision.
2.2. Fair play – An 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.
2.3. Confidentiality – An editor and any editorial staff of the journal 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.
2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
2.4.1. 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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead of 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.
2.5. Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note as may be relevant.
2.6. Involvement and cooperation in investigations – 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). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
3.2. Promptness – Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of the journal and excuse himself from the review process.
3.3. Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
3.4. Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5. 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 paper which they have personal knowledge.
3.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
3.6.1. 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.
3.6.2. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts 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 papers.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1. Reporting standards
4.1.1. Authors of reports 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 paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
4.2. Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
4.3. Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document.
4.5. Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should 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. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
4.6. Authorship of the Paper
4.6.1. 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 acknowledged or listed as contributors.
4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4.7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.7.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
4.7.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.
4.8. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of the journal "Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov» and cooperate with publisher to retract or correct the paper. 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.
5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of the journal "Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov» in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
5.2. The publisher should support the journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
5.3. The publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
5.4. The publisher should provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.Founder/Publisher
Baykov Institute of Materials Science 49, Leninsky prosp.
Moscow 119334, Russia
Phone: +7 (499) 135-62-75; 135-96-56
e-mail: zavlabor@imet.ac.ru
Author fees
Publication in “Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov" is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn't have any Arcticle processing charges.
The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.
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 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 papers.
Plagiarism detection
“Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in “Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.
As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in “Zavodskaya laboratoriya. Diagnostika materialov" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.
Glossary (by SHERPA)
