Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The journal presents results of researches concerning algebra, approximation theory for the functions of real variable, the equations of mathematical physics, and their application to problem solution.
The journal is intended for research officers, postgraduate and undergraduate students.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

The following text is a «standard» piece, taken from external sources and adjusted slightly. The Editorial Board would like to express gratitude to these sources.

Every manuscript is preliminary evaluated by the editors for fitting the journal scope and adhering to the minimal requirements. After a positive decision, the manuscript is send for review to at least two external experts working in the respective area. The manuscript undergoes blind review (i.e. the authors don't know who reviews the manuscript). Reviewer's comments and suggested corrections are then forwarded to the authors. The responsible editor informs the authors of the acceptance status (accept without corrections, resubmit with corrections, reject). This process normally takes up to 4 weeks.

The reviewers judge the paper based on the following criteria:

  1. The results must be novel and of scientific value.
  2. The material must be well-presented in accordance with the general standards, e.g.:
    • the title and abstract must reflect the content of the paper;
    • the material must be presented in a clear and logical way;
    • illustrations and supplementary materials must add to the understanding of the problem;
    • conclusions must be well-grounded and solid;
    • references must be present in good amount and correspond to the article context;
    • illustrations must be well-designed.
  3. The article must have the following sections:
    • statement of the general problem and its relation to important fundamental or practical questions of science;
    • overview of the latest research and publications dealing with the same problem;
    • statement of the unsolved issues remaining in the area that were addressed in the presented paper;
    • outline of the article goals;
    • detailed narrative of the performed work with a comprehensive discussion of the obtained results;
    • conclusions and future work.

P.S. The authors should not attempt, under any circumstances, to identify the reviewers and contact them (by e-mail, skype, carrier pigeons etc.) to «clarify something»; in that case the reviewer preserves a right to self-relieve of the reviewing process. The manuscript adhering to aforementioned requirements is the authors' prime and the best way to exclude all such issues.

 

Publication Frequency

The journal is published one issue per year.
The new issue appears online in September.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to all published materials, ensuring fast sharing of information and efficient exchange of knowledge.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics

The following text, with minor corrections, was borrowed from the sites of several journals, to whom, along with the compilers of the text, the Editorial Board expresses gratitude.

Dnipro University Mathematics Bulletin follows the Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors to ensure ethics and quality in publication.

Oles Honchar Dnipro National University (DNU) as a publisher of Dnipro University Mathematics Bulletin takes its duties to guarantee serious approach to all stages of publishing and recognizes the responsibilities. Advertising, reprint and/or any commercial revenue have no influence on editorial decisions.

Compliance with standards of ethical behaviour is therefore expected of all parties involved in the publishing process: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

Duties of the Editor and the Editorial Board

  1. Publication decisions. The Editor makes a decision on publication of the submitted papers. It is guided by the journal's policy and is based absolutely on the academic value and the conclusion of the reviewers. The Editor clings to the contemporary regulations regarding defamation, copyright violation and plagiarism. He is entitled to carry out decision-making in consultation with reviewers or members of the editorial board.
    An editor cannot use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning the submitted manuscript or published paper.
    An editor evaluates manuscripts without regard to previous merits, race, ethnic origin, gender, religion, citizenship, sexual orientation, or political philosophy of the authors.
  2. Confidentiality. The Editor and Editorial Board do not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript (author(s), topic, text, etc.) to anyone other than the corresponding author, (potential) reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  3. Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in any research of the editor, reviewers or any other informed person without the written consent of the authors. Privileged information or arguments obtained through peer review will be kept confidential and not used for personal or third party advantage. Editor and any member of the editorial board release themselves from the duties of considering manuscripts in case of any conflicts of interest resulting from collaborative, competitive, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies/institutions having relevance to the manuscripts. Editor can require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests. In case of revealing the competing interests after publication, the corrections will be published. A retraction or expression of concern may be published if needed.
  4. Ensuring the integrity: involvement and cooperation. Dnipro University Mathematics Bulletin will respond to all claims or doubt of research or publication misconduct raised by readers, reviewers, or others. If concerns about the conduct or validity of academic work are raised, the Editorial Board with an involvement of relevant experts, as appropriate, will assess cases of possible plagiarism or duplicate/redundant publication. The editor will also ask the author(s) about responding to the affairs. Dnipro University Mathematics Bulletin will take this to the institutional level: the journal may request an investigation by the institution or other appropriate bodies, if that response is unsatisfactory.
    In cases when concerns are very serious and the published work is likely to influence the scientific knowledge or practical applications, Dnipro University Mathematics Bulletin may consider informing readers about these concerns, by issuing an «expression of concern», and then publish explanations the findings of the investigation. Otherwise Dnipro University Mathematics Bulletin may decide to retract a paper if the Editorial Board is persuaded that severe misconduct has happened. Retracted papers will be retained online, and conspicuously marked as a retraction for the readers' benefit.

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions. Peer review is an obligatory step in making editorial decisions and, if necessary, in improving the paper through the editorial communications with the author.
  2. Efficiency. The reviewer, asked for peer review, who feels the shortage of qualification in the research reported in a manuscript or knows about the lack of time that makes his/her review impossible at the appointed time should notify the editor and relieve himself from the review process.
  3. Confidentiality. Any manuscripts and supplementary materials received for review must be processed as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with third parties except as authorized by the editor.
  4. Standards of Objectivity. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unsuitable. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  5. Acknowledgement of Sources. Reviewers should indicate relevant published papers that has not been discussed/cited by the author(s). Any assertion that an observation, conclusion, or suggestion had been previously reported should be supported by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also inform about any important similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper.
  6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. Privileged information or arguments obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal or third party advantage. Reviewers should release themselves from the duties of manuscripts consideration in case of any conflicts of interest resulting from collaborative, competitive, or other relationships or connections with any of the author(s), companies/institutions having relevance to the manuscripts.
  7. Reviewer misconduct. Editors will take reviewer's misconduct seriously and investigate any evidence of confidentiality breach, non-declaration of conflicts of interest (both financial and non-financial), inappropriate use of confidential material, or delay of peer review for competitive advantage. Allegations of severe reviewer misconduct (e.g. plagiarism) will be taken to the institutional level.

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting standards. Authors reporting results 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.
  2. Data Access and Retention. Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if practicable. Authors should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. The confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
  3. Originality and Plagiarism.Authors should ensure that submitted manuscript:
    • describes entirely original work;
    • is not plagiarized;
    • has not been published elsewhere in any language;
    • indicates appropriate citation or quotation, if the authors have used the work and/or words of others.
    Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement.
  4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently creates unethical publishing conduct and is unacceptable.
  5. Acknowledgement of Sources. Authors will submit only entirely original works, and proper acknowledgment of other works must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
  6. Authorship of a manuscript. 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 named in an Acknowledgement section.
    The corresponding author should ensure that all contributing co-authors (according to the above definition) and no uninvolved co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
  7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. 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.
  8. Fundamental errors in published works. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to notify the journal editor or publisher promptly and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  9. Disclaimer. Neither the editors nor the Editorial Board are responsible for authors' expressed opinions, views, and the contents of the published manuscripts in the journal. The originality, proofreading of manuscripts and errors are the sole responsibility of the individual authors.

 

Documents

State registration certificate of print mass medium: series КВ № 21226-11026Р from 12.03.2015