Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

The Editors of the journal "Energy Engineering and Control Systems", published by Lviv Polytechnic National University, are guided by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when selecting and publishing the papers.

The Editors of the journal set a list of ethical standards below. These standards should be taken into consideration by every person (editors, reviewers and authors) involved in the publishing process.

 

Duties of Editors

  1. The editor should consider all manuscripts submitted for publication without prejudice, evaluating each on their merits without regard to race, religion, nationality, status, or institutional affiliation of the authors.
  2. The information shall not be published if there is sufficient reason to believe that it is a plagiarism.
  3. All submitted materials are carefully selected and reviewed. The editorial board reserves the right to reject a paper or return it for correction and improvement. It is obligatory for the author to improve the paper according to the comments of the reviewers or the editorial board.
  4. The rejected papers shall not be re-reviewed.
  5. The decision of the editor about the paper publication is based on such characteristics of the paper as the importance of results, originality, quality of presentation and conformity to the journal’s profile. The manuscripts may be rejected without review if the editor considers them inappropriate for the journal’s profile. When making such decisions the editor may consult with members of the editorial board or reviewers.
  6. The editor and editorial board members may not hand over any information related to the content of the submitted manuscript to other people, than those who are participating in the professional evaluation of the manuscript. After a positive decision the paper will be published in the printed and online issues of the journal.
  7. It is prohibited to publish and/or distribute the materials from the journal by third parties or organizations in printed and electronic media. Reference to the primary source is required in case the materials published herein are used in the context of other documents.
  8. The responsibility and the rights of the journal editor for a manuscript, authored by the editor himself, should be delegated to another qualified person on the editorial board.
  9. Unpublished materials represented in the submitted manuscript may not be used in their own research works by the editor or editorial board members without the written consent of the author. The authors should disclose any conflicts of interest and publish corrections if conflicts of interest have been identified after publication. The editor shall address the issues of conflict of interest of authors, reviewers and members of the editorial board.
  10. If there are any conflicts of interests (financial, academic, personal) all the participants of the review process should notify the editorial board. All controversial issues shall be discussed at a meeting of the editorial board.
  11. The editor is ready to take into consideration a convincing criticism of papers published in the journal.
  12. The papers approved for publication are publicly available on the journal's website in open access. Copyrights are reserved for the authors.
  13. The views of authors, readers, reviewers and editorial board members on how to improve the journal are important to the editor.

 

Duties of Reviewers

  1. To ensure objective evaluation of all the submitted manuscripts, each manuscript undergoes a peer-review by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field.
  2. Since the review of manuscripts is an important step in the publishing process, each scientist is required to do some work on the review.
  3. If a selected reviewer is not convinced that his/her qualification is in line with the level of research presented in the manuscript, he/she shall immediately return the manuscript.
  4. The reviewer should judge objectively the quality of the manuscript, its experimental and theoretical work, its interpretation and exposition, and consider the extent to which the work meets high scientific and literary standards. The reviewer should respect the intellectual independence of the authors.
  5. The reviewer should consider the possibility of a conflict of interest when the manuscript is closely related to the current or published work of the reviewer. If in doubt, the reviewer should immediately return the manuscript to the editor without review, indicating the conflict of interest.
  6. The reviewer should treat the manuscript submitted for review as a confidential document. The manuscript should not be shown to other people or discussed with others colleagues, except in special cases when the reviewer needs someone's special advice.
  7. The reviewers should adequately explain and reason their opinions so that editors and authors can understand what their comments are based on. Any allegation that the conclusion, result or argument previously stated in the manuscript may have been previously published must be accompanied by the appropriate citation or reference.
  8. The reviewer should note any instances of insufficient citation of works carried out by other scientists.
  9. The reviewer should draw the editor’s attention to any significant similarity between the manuscript under review and any published paper or any manuscript submitted to another journal at the same time.
  10. The reviewer should provide feedback in a timely manner.
  11. Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments or interpretations contained in the manuscript reviewed, except with the consent of the author.

 

Authors’ Responsibilities

  1. The authors should ensure that they have written the original papers, and if the results or words of other authors are used, it is duly presented as references or citations in quotation marks. The papers shall be checked for plagiarism by the editorial board.
  2. Submission of the same paper in more than one journal is considered as unethical behaviour and is unacceptable.
  3. Only those who have made a contribution to the obtained results presented in the paper can be authors of the paper.
  4. The data in the paper should be represented without mistakes.
  5. The paper must be well structured, contain enough references and be prepared according to the requirements.
  6. Unfair or deliberately inaccurate statements in the paper constitute unethical conduct and are inadmissible.
  7. The author who corresponds with the editorial board must ensure that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its publication.
  8. In the event of disagreement with the reviewer’s comments, the authors submit to the editorial board their substantiated response to the reviewer’s comments.
  9. The authors have the opportunity to respond to the criticism of their papers.
  10. The authors of the papers bear full responsibility for the content of the papers and for the very fact of their publication. The editorial board should not be responsible for any damages to the authors or third parties caused by the publication of the papers. The editorial board has the right to remove a paper if it is found out that in the course of publishing the paper, someone's rights or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics have been violated. The editorial board should inform the author of the fact of removal of the paper.
  11. The author shall have no right to reprint the paper in other editions without the consent of the editorial board. If someone borrows material from the paper, then they should make a reference to this paper.
  12. The space in the journal is limited, so the authors are required to use it wisely and economically.