Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The requirements of publication ethics in the preparation and publication of the Natural Science Review journal apply to all participants in the editorial and publishing process, i.e. authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher.

The Natural Science Review's editorial policy is based on the provisions of reputable international associations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), as well as the recommendations of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP-ANRI), which establish standards of ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the publication (authors, editors of the journal, reviewers, publishers, and the scientific community). 

Publisher's ethical obligations:

1. The publisher supports the journal's editorial board in implementing a policy of scientific integrity and compliance with international standards of publication ethics (COPE, etc.).
2. The publisher ensures editorial independence, i.e. editorial decisions are made solely on the basis of the scientific significance of the materials and do not depend on commercial, political, or other interests.
3. The publisher provides the necessary organizational, technical, and legal resources for the journal's functioning, including support for reviewing, storing, and distributing publications.
4. The publisher guarantees the long-term archiving of published materials and the preservation of open access.
5. In case of complaints or violations of publication ethics, the publisher, together with the editorial board, considers the situation and takes the necessary measures, including corrections or withdrawal of the publication, in accordance with the COPE recommendations.

Editorial team's ethical obligations:

1. The journal's editorial team is guided by the principles of scientific integrity, objectivity, professionalism, and impartiality.
2. Cooperation with authors is based on the principles of politeness, benevolence, honesty, and transparency.
3. The journal's editorial team checks all manuscripts submitted as original articles for incorrect borrowings. If the editorial team finds numerous borrowings, it acts in accordance with the COPE rules.
4. The editorial team takes reasonable measures to identify and prevent other violations of research and publication ethics, including citation manipulation, data falsification or fabrication, and other forms of misconduct. The editorial team does not encourage and does not tolerate such violations.
5. The editorial team guarantees that all articles submitted for publication are reviewed without prejudice and ensures an independent review while preserving the reviewer's anonymity.
6. The editorial team does its best to find the most suitable and qualified reviewers in each field of research. Members of the editorial board and the international editorial board can be reviewers.
7. The editorial team decides to publish the material taking into account the opinion of reviewers. Positive reviews are not a sufficient reason for accepting an article for publication. Members of the editorial board make a final decision on publication after the author has finished correcting the article based on the comments of reviewers and members of the editorial board. The editor-in-chief and the editorial board make the final decision when there is a conflict.
8. The editorial team ensures confidentiality in relation to all issues related to the content and review of the manuscript. Information about the manuscript's contents can only be provided to persons involved in its professional evaluation. Unpublished data of the submitted manuscripts may not be used without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas that become known to persons involved in editing or reviewing cannot be used by them for personal purposes.
9. The author has the right to express a reasoned point of view that does not coincide with the editorial team's opinion.
10. The editorial team does not allow publications that contribute to the incitement of social, ethnic, or religious hatred.
11. Upon notifying the author of the final editorial decision, the editorial team is not obliged to enter into further correspondence concerning the merits of that decision, except where a complaint or appeal is submitted in accordance with the journal’s established procedure.
12. Nevertheless, should the author disagree with the editorial team's decision to reject the article, the author has the right to appeal in writing to journal's editorial team addressing the Editor-in-Chief, indicating the reasons to support their position. The Editor-in-Chief together with the editorial board consider the appeal. If necessary, they may appoint additional independent review. The editorial board makes the final decision on the appeal and notifies the author in writing.
13. The journal’s editorial team guarantees access to publications on the journal's website and ensures material storage in leading national and international libraries and scientific information repositories.

Reviewers' ethical obligations:

1. The main purpose of reviewing is to provide an objective assessment of the article's scientific characteristics. It is done to help the editor–in–chief and the editorial board make a reasoned decision on the advisability of publishing the manuscript, and authors to improve the material proposed for publication.
2. The reviewer should consider the obtained manuscript a confidential document. It cannot be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editorial board.
3. The reviewer's opinion should be reasoned and impartial.
4. The reviewer should draw the attention of the author and the editorial board to any substantial similarity between the submitted manuscript and any other publication that he knows about. The reviewer should provide references to the original source when recommending the author to add references to publications, observations, measurements, or facts.
5. Reviewers should not review 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 article.
6. The reviewer has the right to refuse to review the proposed article if he feels insufficiently competent to prepare a review in this area or cannot review to meet the deadline. The review period may be extended by agreement with the editorial board.
7. The reviewer has the right to request manuscript re-reviewing.

Authors' ethical obligations:

1. By submitting the manuscript for consideration as an original article, authors guarantee that the material does not contain plagiarism and has not been published previously, and is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.  The author has the right to withdraw the manuscript at any stage before publication on the website with compulsory notification to the editorial team.
2. Only those who have made a significant contribution to the research and preparation of the submitted material should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors are listed, as well as for ensuring that all co-authors see and approve the article's final version and agree to submit it for publication.
3. Authors are aware of and responsible for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, the reliability of information, quotations, data, etc. It is prohibited to use other people's texts without reference to the source and authorship.
4. Self-plagiarism is also prohibited, including the reuse of substantial parts of own previously published works without providing appropriate reference.
5. If the author finds major errors or inaccuracies in the article, the author must notify the editor of this and cooperate with the editorial team in correcting errors.
6. Authors should participate in the review process, i.e. promptly answer the questions of the editorial team, respond to comments from reviewers.
7. When arguing with other authors or journals, authors are to comply with the norms of academic correctness.
8. Authors should notify the editorial team of any conflicts of interest.
9. Information about grants and any other financial support for research should be listed. 
10. General information on any assistance in carrying out the research and preparing the article should be included.

Authorship and Co-authorship

Authorship

Basic principles

When making a list of authors for a submitted manuscript, the following aspects should be considered:

• The authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the development of the concept, design, research, interpretation, and writing of the article.
• The author who is responsible for communicating with the journal (the corresponding author) confirms that all co-authors are included in the list of authors.
• Other persons who participated in some research stages should be mentioned in the Acknowledgements section.
• Invited or honorary authorship is not allowed. For example, inclusion of individuals who did not significantly contribute to the article, but were added for the prestige or other unscientific reasons.
• The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors read and approve the final version of the manuscript and agree with its publication.
• The corresponding author should also confirm that they will communicate properly and promptly with the journal's editorial team at the submission, review, and post-publication stages.
• AI and AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as the authors of the manuscript. See the relevant section.

Authorship Changes

The editor responsible for the publication should be notified with a detailed explanation if any changes are made in the authorship list in the originally submitted manuscript (addition or removal of authors, change of the corresponding author, or reordering of authors). The corresponding author is obliged to notify the editor responsible for the publication of any changes in the authorship list of the manuscript before its final acceptance for publication. In addition, it is necessary to confirm that all authors (including those who are being added or removed) have been notified and have agreed to the changes. If significant changes in the authorship list are found in the original and accepted manuscript (for example, adding or removing authors without notifying the editor), the journal will conduct an investigation in accordance with COPE recommendations, which may lead to certain consequences, including possible withdrawal of the article.

It is highly undesirable to change authorship after publication, but can be considered in exceptional cases (for example, if errors are found or for ethical reasons) as part of a published correction related to the original article.

Specific cases

Authors should indicate all persons who have contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship, such as technical staff or data processing specialists, indicating their contributions. Please use the Acknowledgments section for this.

Deceased authors who meet the criteria of authorship should be listed as co-authors with a note "Deceased". Authors should obtain the appropriate consent from the institution or the heirs of the deceased author, if possible.

If two authors have contributed equally to the article, they may indicate the dual authorship by putting an asterisk on the manuscript's title page and making a short note: "X and XX contributed equally to this article."

Project participation

We follow the widely accepted CRediT taxonomy to highlight the unique contribution of each co-author: conceptualisation, data curation, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, software, supervision, validation, visualisation, writing — original draft, writing — review and editing. There is a field in the template file to represent this information.

Authors who do not meet the CRediT authorship criteria (for example, providing minor technical assistance or administrative support) should be listed in the Acknowledgements section with their specific contributions. By following these guidelines and clearly documenting individual contributions using the CRediT taxonomy, authors may ensure transparent and complete attribution of author roles in their manuscripts.

Plagiarism Policy

The Editorial Board of Natural Science Review considers plagiarism a serious and unacceptable violation of the principles of academic and publication ethics.

By submitting a manuscript for consideration as an original article, authors confirm its originality, the absence of plagiarism, and that the submitted material has not been previously published.

Borrowed texts, ideas, data, images, tables, and other materials must be accompanied by appropriate source attribution. Direct quotations must be clearly identified and formatted in accordance with accepted citation rules.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are screened for improper borrowing using the Antiplagiat system. If signs of plagiarism or self-plagiarism are detected, the Editorial Board may request an explanation from the authors and ask them to make the necessary corrections to the manuscript. If substantial improper borrowing is confirmed before publication, the manuscript will be rejected. If such borrowing is identified after publication, the Editorial Board may publish a correction or retract the article, depending on the nature and extent of the violation.

Such cases are handled in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest Policy

All participants in the peer review and publication process must disclose all relationships that could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest, i.e. financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony), personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual passion.

1. Authors

Authors are required to disclose and indicate any conflicts of interest when submitting a manuscript. The corresponding author is to provide a statement on behalf of all co-authors using one of the following statements provided:

• "The authors declare the following conflicts of interest..."
• "The authors declare no competing interests".
• "The authors declare that they are bound by confidentiality agreements that prevent them from disclosing their competing interests in this article."

Authors are required to disclose all sources of research support (funding), including sponsors. The role of sponsors, if any, should be declared in relation to the study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data, writing a manuscript, and decision to submit the article for publication. If funding sources had no such involvement this should be stated in your submission.

2. Reviewers

Reviewers should not evaluate 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 submission.

If a reviewer is unsure whether there is a conflict of interest, they are required to notify the editorial board, which will make a decision.

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript's contents and not use the information for personal gain.

3. Journal's editors and staff

Journal's editors and staff are required to refrain from making decisions on articles in which they have conflicts of interest, including personal, academic, or institutional ties with the authors.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the authors.

Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Research Ethics

Research Ethics and Ethical Oversight

Natural Science Review (NSR) is committed to internationally recognised principles of research and publication ethics and takes into account relevant guidance issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and other applicable international standards and guidelines.

Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants, identifiable human biological material, or identifiable personal data must be conducted in accordance with applicable institutional and national ethical requirements and, where relevant, with the principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.

Where ethical approval is required, the manuscript must state the full name of the relevant ethics committee, institutional review board (IRB), or other appropriate body and provide the approval or reference number, where available. Authors must also state whether and how informed consent to participate was obtained, where applicable.

Authors are responsible for protecting the privacy and confidentiality of research participants. Identifiable personal information or images must not be published unless such information is scientifically necessary and appropriate consent for publication has been obtained. Particular care must be taken when research involves children or other potentially vulnerable participants or populations.

Research Involving Animals

Research involving animals must comply with applicable institutional and national requirements governing animal welfare and the ethical use of animals in research.

Where prior ethical approval is required, the manuscript must identify the relevant animal ethics committee or other approving body and provide the approval or permit number, where available.

Authors are encouraged to follow the ARRIVE Guidelines 2.0 and to apply the principles of the 3Rs — Replacement, Reduction and Refinement — in the design, conduct, and reporting of animal research.

Ethics Statement

For research requiring ethical oversight, authors must include an Ethics Statement in the manuscript containing information on ethical approval and informed consent, where applicable.

A typical statement may take the following form:

Ethics Statement:
The study was approved by [full name of the ethics committee/institutional review board], approval/reference No. [number]. Informed consent was obtained from all participants [where applicable].

Editorial Ethical Oversight

The Editorial Board of NSR reserves the right to request documentation confirming ethical approval, informed consent, or other relevant permissions, as well as any additional information necessary to assess compliance with the journal’s ethical standards.

Compliance with institutional or national requirements does not in itself guarantee publication. A manuscript may be rejected if the Editorial Board determines that the research does not meet appropriate ethical standards.

If ethical concerns arise after publication, NSR may request additional information, consult relevant institutions or independent experts, and take appropriate editorial action, including the publication of a correction, expression of concern, or retraction, in accordance with the journal’s policies and relevant COPE guidance.

Use of Artificial Intelligence and Automated Tools

Authors

• If authors used generative AI tools or AI-assisted technologies, including tools such as ChatGPT, in preparing the manuscript, they must disclose this in the “Additional Information” section of the provided template when submitting the manuscript. A possible wording may be as follows: “In preparing this article, we used [name of tool/service] for [purpose]. After using this tool/service, we reviewed and edited the content and take full responsibility for the content of the published article.”
• If the manuscript contains images, tables, data, code, translations, or other elements created, processed, or substantially modified using generative AI or AI-assisted tools, authors must also disclose this in the “Additional Information” section, providing a detailed description of when and how such tools were used. In addition, authors must confirm that they have all necessary rights to use the relevant materials.
• In all cases, the use of AI must be accompanied by human oversight and verification. Authors must carefully check and edit the output, as AI-generated text may contain errors, be incomplete, or biased. Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, originality, and impartiality of the manuscript content, the reliability of data, the correctness of references, the absence of plagiarism, and compliance with publication ethics standards.
• Only humans may be authors of a manuscript. AI and AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as an author or co-author, as they do not meet the criteria for authorship: they cannot take responsibility for the work, consent to publication, manage copyright, or participate in resolving issues related to conflicts of interest.
• The editorial office may reject a manuscript or suspend its consideration if improper, undisclosed, or misleading use of AI tools by the authors is identified.

Reviewers

• Reviewers are prohibited from using generative AI or other AI tools when analyzing a manuscript, interpreting its content, formulating an expert assessment, and preparing recommendations for the editorial office.
• Reviewers must not upload manuscripts, unpublished data, images, supplementary files, or any other confidential information obtained during the peer review process to such services or tools. This prohibition is intended to protect manuscript confidentiality, authors’ rights, and compliance with publication ethics standards.
• The reviewer bears personal responsibility for the content of their review.

Editors

• The journal does not use generative AI or automated tools to make editorial decisions, assess the scientific significance of manuscripts, or replace expert peer review. Decisions to accept, request revision of, or reject manuscripts are made by editors based on editorial assessment and the results of peer review.
• Editors must not upload unpublished manuscripts, data, reviews, editorial correspondence, or any other confidential information to publicly available generative AI services or other automated tools. The use of any tools involving the processing of confidential materials is permitted only within procedures approved by the editorial office and in compliance with confidentiality, data protection, and copyright requirements.
• Automated tools may be used by the journal only for technical and administrative purposes, such as plagiarism screening, formatting checks, language checks, metadata processing, or support of the editorial process. Such use does not replace human editorial assessment.

This section has been prepared based on materials from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP).

Peer Review

Peer Review Process

1. Peer Review Process is carried out according to the requirements of the Publication Ethics of the Natural Science Review journal and recognised international standards of scientific review.
2. The journal reviews all submitted scientific materials that correspond to its subject matter and subject to review in accordance with the journal's editorial policy, for the purpose of expert assessment. If the manuscript does not correspond to the stated subject area or the journal's editorial policy, the article will not be sent for review, and the editors will immediately notify the author of this.
3. Upon receipt of the manuscript, an initial editorial assessment is carried out, including an evaluation of its relevance to the journal’s subject area, compliance with formal requirements, and editorial standards.
   The journal strives to complete this stage and make an initial editorial decision within 7 calendar days from the submission date.
4. If a manuscript fits the journal’s subject area but requires technical or linguistic editing, it may be returned to the authors for revision without being sent for review. After making corrections, authors simply need to upload the corrected file(s) to the system as part of an existing application.
5. Book reviews, reviews of scientific events, obituaries, archival documents, letters to the editor, and other similar materials are not subject to peer review. The decision on their publication is made by the Editorial Board on the recommendation of the editors.
6. If the manuscript is deemed suitable for reviewing, the scientific editor sends the manuscript to reviewers and informs the author and the editorial team's executive secretary.
7. The journal operates a single-blind peer review system, which means that reviewers know the manuscript's authors, but the authors are not informed of the reviewers’ identities.
8. The number of reviewers working with one article is not limited. At least two independent experts are involved in the examination.
9. As a rule, reviewers are experts that have a PhD or DSc and proven academic expertise in the article's subject area. Reviewers do not participate in editorial decisions regarding the articles they review and have no conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the submitted manuscript.
10. The reviewer must not have a conflict of interest with the manuscript's author(s). If a conflict of interest is discovered, the reviewer must decline participation in the review process.
11. If the reviewer declines to assess the manuscript, the editorial board selects another expert. The editorial team reserves the right to appoint additional reviewers and/or conduct its own expert assessment.
12. The journal aims for a review period of about 14 calendar days from the reviewer’s confirmation of participation. If necessary, the reviewer may request additional time. The editorial board prioritises the quality and completeness of the expert assessment.
13. As a rule, the review addresses the following issues:

• whether the article’s content matches the stated topic;
• the advisability of publishing an article taking into account modern scientific achievements and previously published research;
• the quality of language, style, structure, and presentation of material;
• the strengths and weaknesses of the article, and recommendations for its improvement.

14. The reviewer submits a review in free form and recommends one of the following decisions:

• accept the article for publication without corrections;
• accept the article for publication with minor corrections;
• return the article to the author for revision;
• reject the article (with reasons specified).

15. The scientific editor considers the reviews and makes one of the following decisions:

• accept the article for publication;
• send the article for additional review;
• return the article to the author for revision;
• reject the article (with reasons specified).

16. The scientific editor sends the reviews to the author and, if revisions are necessary, suggests that the author take them into account or refute them in a reasoned way.
    Authors are generally given up to 14 calendar days to prepare a revised version of the article. If an extension is needed, the author must inform the editorial team. When resending, authors should provide a version of the manuscript, which highlights all changes, and a list of changes made to the manuscript.
17. The revised manuscript may be sent for another review round. The review process concludes when the editorial team has sufficient information to make a decision and is generally limited to two or three rounds.
18. The scientific editor reserves the right to reject the article if the author fails to respond to editorial requests within one month.
19. Should the author disagree with the decision to reject the article, the author has the right to submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief, stating the reasons to support their position. The Editor-in-Chief together with the editorial board consider the appeal. If necessary, they may commission additional independent review. The editorial board makes the final decision and notifies the author in writing.
20. After the decision to publish an article is made, the scientific editor informs the author and the executive secretary and sends the material for editorial and technical preparation. The journal aims for a period of about 14 calendar days for copyediting, proofreading, and layout. The actual time frames for editorial and technical preparation depend on the length and complexity of the manuscript and may be extended in some cases.
21. Reviews and review materials are stored for at least 5 years. Providing copies of reviews to the authorised bodies of the JINR Member States is possible only in justified cases, upon official request, and in compliance with the confidentiality principles of the editorial process.

Complaints and Appeals

Natural Science Review (NSR) considers substantiated complaints concerning the editorial process, the conduct of editors or reviewers, compliance with the journal’s policies, publication ethics, and other matters related to the journal’s activities.

Complaints should be submitted in writing to the Editorial Office and should clearly describe the subject of the complaint and, where possible, include relevant supporting documentation. Complaints are considered by the Editor-in-Chief together with the Editorial Board and, where appropriate, the Publisher.

Authors who disagree with an editorial decision to reject a manuscript have the right to submit a written appeal addressed to the Editor-in-Chief, clearly stating the reasons for the appeal and providing justification for their position. An appeal should be based on specific scientific or procedural grounds and, where appropriate, should address the comments of the editors and reviewers.

Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief together with the Editorial Board. Where necessary, additional independent peer review may be arranged. The final decision on an appeal is made by the Editorial Board and communicated to the author in writing.

The Editorial Office acknowledges receipt of complaints and appeals and aims to provide a reasoned response within a reasonable period of time. Complaints and appeals are handled in accordance with applicable guidance issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Post Publication

Post Publication Discussions

Natural Science Review (NSR) supports scholarly discussion of articles published in the journal.

Readers may submit a Comment presenting substantive criticism, clarification, or correction of a previously published article. A Comment should clearly identify the article concerned, address specific scientific issues, and be written in a professional and collegial tone. Criticism should focus on the content of the work rather than on the authors personally.

Comments are subject to editorial assessment and, where appropriate, may be sent for independent peer review. The Editorial Office may decline Comments that lack substantial scientific content, merely repeat previously published arguments without providing new information, or do not meet the standards of professional scholarly communication.

The authors of the original article are normally given an opportunity to submit a Reply. Accepted Comments and Replies may be published and linked to the original article.

If post-publication discussion identifies an error requiring a formal correction, NSR acts in accordance with its CrossMark and Correction Policies. Matters raising serious concerns about the reliability or integrity of a published article are handled in accordance with the journal’s Article Retraction policy and applicable COPE guidance.

CrossMark and Correction Policies

CrossMark Policy

DOI: 10.54546/crossmark-policy-page

CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref that provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of an article or other published content.

By applying the CrossMark logo, the Natural Science Review journal is committing to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.

Clicking the CrossMark logo on a document will tell you its current status and may also give you additional publication-record information about the document.

Correction Policy

The Editors adhere to the policy of making changes and correcting errors, typos, or inaccuracies in published articles according to the guidelines of the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The authors should immediately inform the Editorial Team if they have found errors, typos, or inaccuracies in their published article.

Corrections that the Editorial Team makes after the publication of the article:

Addendum

An Addendum is made if important information, data, or results have been inadvertently missed in the article. For example, the author's affiliation is not specified, the grant number is missing, the necessary funding information or explanations for any aspect are missing, the object or method of research is not specified, etc.

The Addendum is presented as an Appendix to the published article, which reports on previously missed information. The Addendum is published in the online version of the journal's current issue with the article number. The original article is not changed, but a hyperlink to the Addendum, to which its own DOI is assigned, is added to it. 

Erratum

An Erratum is a notification about minor errors or typos that may affect the perception of information presented in an article. For example, a spelling or factual error in the title, an error in the author's last name or first name, an error in the author's affiliation, an error in the author's email; missing or illegible numbers in the text, tables, figures; a missing or incorrectly written word; a typo in the formula or in its interpretation; etc.

Corrections are made to the online version of the published article and the PDF file. The correction notification is posted on the HTML page of the article and in the PDF version.

Minor errors and typos that do not affect the meaning or understanding are not corrected, and the notification is not published.

Corrigenda

Corrigenda are changes that may affect the scientific interpretation of the content of a published article. For example, changing data, including tables and figures, adding new text, new information to objects and methods, changing equations and conclusions, etc. Corrigenda are published as a separate publication with a link to the original article in the current issue. The original article is not changed, but a hyperlink to the Corrigenda, to which the DOI is assigned, is added to it.

Article Retraction

The Natural Science Review journal is guided by the Rules of article retraction of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP) and the Recommendations of the international Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) >> regarding the policy of article retraction.

Article retraction is a mechanism for correcting published information. It alerts readers to articles containing seriously flawed or erroneous data that cannot be relied upon, or that have been published with serious violations of publication ethics.

Article retraction does not mean its removal from the journal website, but warns about the prohibition of its further use by providing information about violations found in it. Only in extreme cases, when the text on the journal website may harm a certain part of the community or science, the article is deleted from the journal website.

In addition, retraction is used to alert readers to cases of duplicate publications (when authors submit the same data in multiple works), plagiarism, and concealment of conflicts of interest that may have influenced the interpretation of the data, and other ethical violations.

Grounds for retracting an article are violations of ethical norms that are generally accepted in the scientific community or ethical principles of the journal.

Grounds for retraction:

• incorrect and/or unattributed borrowing (plagiarism) in a published article;
• publication of the article in several journals;
• self-plagiarism with a large amount of repetition of research results and text already published in other articles;
• falsification or fabrication (for example, falsification of experimental data);
• major errors (for example, incorrect interpretation of research results), questioning its scientific value;
• an incorrect author list (a missing author; people who do not meet the authorship criteria are included);
• a latent conflict of interest;
• re-publication of the article without the consent of the author;
• other violations.

The reason for the article retraction:

• the appeal of the author/authors about the article retraction;
• editorial board's decision based on the expertise.

The editorial board makes the decision to retract the article, taking into account the response of article's author/co-authors explaining the position on the article retraction (upon receipt of the response).

If the author/co-authors consider it necessary to retract the article, they contact the editorial office, explaining the reason for their decision. The editorial board responds to the authors and, if there are grounds for retraction, it independently retracts the text.

If the editorial board decides to retract the article text based on its expertise (including in response to incoming information), the editorial board informs the authors about this and requests their reasoned opinion on the validity of the article retraction. A reasoned opinion is requested from each co-author of the article separately. If the author/co-authors ignore editorial board's request, the editorial board has the right to retract the publication without taking into account authors' opinions.

If the editorial board receives an appeal about grounds for retracting the article, the editorial board informs the author of the appeal about the period of its consideration. The maximum consideration period does not exceed one month. An appeal is not considered if it does not indicate the surname, first name, patronymic of the author, or contact details.

The editor-in-chief forms an expert commission to examine the article and supporting materials. The decision to retract the article is recorded in the minutes of the meeting of the journal editorial board. Having decided to retract the article, the editorial board states the reason for the retraction (in case of plagiarism, indicating borrowing sources), as well as the retraction date. The article and the description of it remain on the journal website as part of the journal issue, but the electronic version of the text is labelled with "RETRACTED" and the retraction date. The same label is placed in the article and in issue's table of contents.

After the article is retracted from the journal, information about the retraction is sent to national and foreign information resources in which the journal is indexed or published. Information about the retracted articles is passed on to the ASEP Council of Scientific Publication Ethics (for entering information into a single database of retracted articles) and to the Scientific Electronic Library (eLIBRARY.ru). Information about the article and the full text remain on eLIBRARY.ru, but supplemented with information about retraction. The retracted articles and references to them are excluded from the RSCI and do not participate in the calculation of indicators.

Along with deciding to retract an article, the editorial board has the right to ban accepting articles from the author/co-authors of the retracted article for publication for a certain period of time.

Information on article retraction is posted on the journal website.

Open Science

Open Access Policy

Natural Science Review is an open access journal. All articles are freely and immediately available to readers without subscription, registration, or access fees. Users may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search the articles, link to their full texts, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use the materials for any other lawful purpose in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). Commercial use of the materials, including the reproduction of text, tables, figures, or other elements of an article in books, journals, or other publications issued by commercial publishers, requires the prior written consent of the authors.

Article Processing Charge

Publication in the journal is free of charge for authors. The editorial office does not charge any fees for manuscript submission, review, preparation, hosting, or publication.

Preprint and Postprint Placement Policy

A Preprint is the author’s version of a manuscript prior to peer review. Authors may post preprints on preprint servers, in institutional and subject repositories, and on personal websites. The existence of a preprint does not prevent submission of the manuscript to Natural Science Review. Upon submission, authors should inform the editorial team of the preprint DOI, if assigned, and of the licensing terms applicable on the platform where it is posted. After publication of the article, the preprint record should be updated to include the DOI and a link to the published article.

An Accepted Manuscript / Postprint is the version of an article that has undergone peer review and has been accepted for publication, but has not yet undergone the journal’s final editorial preparation and typesetting. Authors may deposit this version in institutional and subject repositories and on personal websites. After publication, the deposited version should include the DOI and a link to the final published version of the article.

The Version of Record may be deposited in institutional and other non-commercial repositories in accordance with the terms of the CC BY-NC 4.0 license, provided that the original publication in Natural Science Review is properly acknowledged and the DOI and a link to the article are included.

Data Availability Policy

The NSR Journal supports the principles of open science and encourages the open exchange of scientific data between authors, reviewers, and readers. We recommend that authors provide access to the data that support the published results to the extent possible, taking into account legal, ethical, and confidential restrictions. In this regard, underlying research information (raw data, processed data, statistics, algorithms, or protocols) can be shared by its deposition in recognized public repositories. Small datasets may be uploaded as an additional file on the journal's website along with the article.

Where custom software or computer code is essential to reproducing the results of the study, authors are encouraged to make the relevant code available through a suitable public repository or as Supplemental Material, subject to applicable legal, licensing, confidentiality, or security restrictions.

If making the data publicly available is not possible, authors are encouraged to provide a specific rationale in the Data Availability Statement section of the template file, allowing the necessary materials to be made available to interested researchers upon request, provided there are no prohibitions. In cases when data cannot be shared due to ethical, legal, or privacy considerations, this should also be stated.

Authors must provide clear and specific reasons in the Data Availability Statement to ensure transparency. The following statements can be used.

Data available for sharing

• The data that support the findings of this study are available in [repository name] at [DOI/URL].
• The data that support the findings of this study are available in the supplementary material of this article.
• The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Data not available for sharing

• The raw/processed data required to reproduce the above findings cannot be shared at this time due to [legal/privacy/ethical] restrictions. [Detailed reasons].
• Data sharing is not applicable to this article, as no new data were generated or analysed (this option is often used for review articles).

Data should be deposited in reputable public repositories that provide persistent identifiers (e.g., DOIs) and ensure long-term accessibility. Authors are encouraged to use discipline-specific repositories where appropriate:

https://zenodo.org

https://github.com/

https://www.hepdata.net/

To select a suitable repository, you may also use the following reference resources:

https://commons.datacite.org/repositories

https://www.re3data.org/

https://fairsharing.org/stakeholders#editors

Please note that the data availability policy for scientific journals is constantly changing. At present, the authors are frequently requested to support their experimental or theoretical findings with initial (raw) data to confirm the transparency and reproducibility of their research and to enable further investigation and validation by independent researchers.

In this context, statements such as “Data are available upon request from the authors” and “The data presented in this article are not readily available because the data are part of an ongoing study” are generally not acceptable. In addition, as a rule, such statements do not meet modern requirements for the openness and reproducibility of scientific research.

Indexing

Publications of the Natural Science Review journal are presented in scientific search, indexing, and information systems.

The journal is indexed in the following systems:

• DOAJ
• Russian Science Citation Index 
• Google Scholar 
• INSPIRE-HEP
• OpenAlex

Archiving and Storing Publications

Full texts of articles published in Natural Science Review are hosted and stored on the journal’s official website. Access to published materials is provided through the journal’s archive of issues.
Information about the journal is also available in the Scientific Electronic Library eLIBRARY.ru. The journal record is available via the link. eLIBRARY.ru provides search functionality for the journal’s publications and bibliographic metadata.
Long-term archiving of the journal’s materials is carried out with the participation of the following organizations and systems:

• Russian State Library (RSL)
• National Electronic Information Consortium (NEICON)
• Scientific Electronic Library eLIBRARY.ru

In case that Natural Science Review stops its functioning, the long-term preservation of and access to published materials will be ensured through the archival systems and repositories listed above.

Publication Rights and Copyright

Copyright and Obligations

Authors who publish in the journal agree to the following terms:

1. Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right to publish the scientific paper for the first time under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license that allows the use, distribution, and reproduction of the article for any non-commercial purposes, provided that the authorship and a link to the original publication in this journal are given.
2. The authors have the right to enter into separate agreements regarding the non-exclusive distribution of the article's published version (for example, its placement in an institutional repository, inclusion in a monograph or collection), provided that there is a link to the original publication.
3. Authors may post their work materials (a preprint or postprint) in open Internet resources (for example, in an institute repository, a personal website, or repositories like arxiv.org) before and during the journal's review process because this may lead to a productive discussion and more links to the scientific paper (See The Effect of Open Access).
4. Articles may contain figures, tables, or text that the authors have taken or adapted from other publications with permission. To obtain permission to use these materials, you must contact the copyright holders.
5. The copyrights to the design, layout, and website belong to the journal. This does not apply to the content created by the authors and related to their articles, i.e. full texts, abstracts, and graphical abstracts, additional materials, etc., which are subject to copyright, as described above.
   
   

   The content is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Public Offer

PUBLIC OFFER LICENSE AGREEMENT

Dubna, Moscow Region

The Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, an international intergovernmental scientific research organization, hereinafter referred to as the "Licensee/Sublicensee", in accordance with Articles 435 and 437 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, invites any individual or entity that has the exclusive or other legal right to use the Work to the extent provided for in this Agreement, hereinafter referred to as the "Licensor/Licensee", to enter into this License Agreement (hereinafter the "Agreement").

1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

1.1. This Agreement is a public offer made by the Licensee/Sublicensee to the Licensor/Licensee and contains the essential terms of the license agreement for granting the right to use the work specified in clause 2.1. of this Agreement under a simple (non-exclusive) license.

1.2 The offer shall be deemed to have been accepted in full upon performance by the Licensor/Licensee of the actions specified in clause 4.1 of this Agreement.

1.3. The Licensor/Licensee shall be deemed to have accepted the terms of this offer and shall acquire the rights and obligations under this offer upon acceptance of the offer.

1.4. The Licensor/Licensee hereby confirms that they accept the terms of the Agreement in full, without reservations or limitations.

2. SUBJECT MATTER

2.1. The Licensor/Licensee, as the owner of exclusive or other legal rights (has obtained all necessary consents from the copyright holders to conclude this Agreement) to use the Work, a scientific article, including created by the authors illustrations, appendices, and references (hereinafter referred to as the “Work”), provides the Licensee/Sublicensee with the right to use the Work within the limits established by this Agreement and for the period established by this Agreement under the terms of a royalty-free simple (non-exclusive) license.

2.2. The Licensor/Licensee grants the Licensee/Sublicensee the right to use the Work in the following ways:

2.2.1. to reproduce the Work, in whole or in part, in any media, including on paper or electronic media as a separate document and / or as a part of the Natural Science Review (hereinafter referred to as the “Journal”) and / or in the databases of the Licensee/Sublicensee and / or other persons, including in the Licensee/Sublicensee's electronic libraries;

2.2.2. to publish and share the copies of the Work, in whole or in part, including on paper or electronic media as a separate document and / or as a part of the Journal and / or in the databases of the Licensee/Sublicensee and / or other persons;

2.2.3. to make the Work available to the public, in part or in whole, in such a way that any person may access the Work from a place and at a time as they see fit, including online, and use the Work under the terms of the CC BY-NC 4.0 license;

2.2.4. to change the Work’s form for its use in computer programs and systems (databases), for publishing and distribution in machine-readable format and indexing by search engines as well as to make modifications to the Work that do not lead to the creation of derivative works.

2.3. All rights specified in clause 2.2. of this Agreement are granted by the Licensor/Licensee to the Licensee/Sublicensee free of charge, without territorial restrictions, for the term of this Agreement upon its signature.

3. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES, WARRANTIES

3.1. The Licensee/Sublicensee shall:

3.1.1. at their own expense, ensure scientific, literary, and copy editing of the Work, illustration processing, paper and / or electronic layout design;

3.1.2. not make any changes to the Work’s title and the Licensor/Licensee’s name without the consent of the Licensor/Licensee;

3.1.3. obtain consent of the Licensor/Licensee to all editorial revisions to the Work or revisions suggested by reviewers of the Work.

3.2. The Licensor/Licensee shall:

3.2.1. immediately notify the Licensee/Sublicensee of the transfer of rights to the Work, including its electronic versions, to a third party;

3.2.2. under clause 3.1.3 of this Agreement, approve revisions to the Work within three (3) calendar days from the receipt of the corresponding notice from the Licensee/Sublicensee or give a reasoned refusal. Should the Licensor/Licensee fail to reply within the indicated time period, the revisions shall be deemed approved by the Licensor/Licensee.

3.3. The Licensor/Licensee warrants that:

3.3.1. they are the owners of the exclusive or other legal right to use the Work to the extent provided for in this Agreement and have the authority to sign this Agreement. The rights to reproduce and use the Work have not been transferred to a third party. No other person holds any rights to the Work. Granting the right to use the Work to the Licensee/Sublicensee does not violate any rights or legitimate interests of third parties;

3.3.2. the Work contains all references to cited Licensors/Licensees and / or publications (materials), as required by the law of the Russian Federation;

3.3.3. all necessary permissions and consents for the results of intellectual activity, the copyright holder of which is not the Licensor/Licensee, facts, and other materials used in the Work have been obtained by the Licensor/Licensee;

3.3.4. The article must not contain materials, the publication of which may violate the obligations of the Licensee/Sublicensee under the terms of the Licensee/Sublicensee's activity in the country of location and damage the security of the Licensee/Sublicensee's country of location.

3.4. The Licensee/Sublicensee guarantees the right to inviolability of the Work and protection from distortion, as well as compliance with the copyright law and the right to recognition of authorship of the Work.

3.5. Licensee/Sublicensee is entitled to:

3.5.1. carry out technical and literary editing of the Work that does not change its main content; 

3.5.2. examine the Work and propose that the Licensor/Licensee should make the necessary changes, until which the Work is not published in the Journal; 

3.5.3. establish the rules (conditions) for the submission and publication of materials in the Journal. The Licensee/Sublicensee has the exclusive rights to select and/or reject materials sent to the editorial office of the Journal for publication. 

3.5.4. temporarily suspend the provision of services to the Licensor/Licensee under the Agreement for technical, technological, or other reasons that impede the provision of services, while such reasons are being eliminated; 

3.5.5. suspend the provision of services under the Agreement unilaterally and extrajudicially in the following cases: 

a) if the Work does not correspond to the subject matter of the Journal (or any part of it), or the submitted material is insufficient for independent publication, or the design of the Work does not meet the requirements;

b) violations by the Licensor/Licensee of other obligations stipulated by this Agreement;

3.5.6. in the process of publishing the Work, request additional documents from the Licensor/Licensee related to the submitted materials;

3.5.7. make changes to the Agreement in accordance with the procedure established by the Agreement.

3.5.8. during the term of this Agreement, transfer the rights to use the Work to third parties within the limits of the rights and methods of use established by this Agreement, including for the purpose of using the Work in third-party databases;

3.5.9. unilaterally refuse to fulfill obligations under this Agreement in the following cases:

3.5.9.1. the Licensor/Licensee's failure to submit the manuscript of the Work due to the fault of the Licensor/Licensee within the time period set by the Licensee/Sublicensee to make final amendments to the Work based on the results of reviewing and/or editing, or failure by the Licensor/Licensee to fulfill other obligations established by the terms of this Agreement;

3.5.9.2. violations of the guarantees specified in clause 3.3 of this Agreement.

4. CONCLUSION, AMENDMENTS, AND TERMINATION

4.1. This Agreement shall enter into force, i.e. shall be deemed fully and unreservedly accepted, upon submission of the Work via the personal account at the website nsr-jinr.ru.

4.2. The Licensee/Sublicensee is entitled to unilaterally change the terms of this Agreement by posting the amended text of the Agreement on the Licensee/Sublicensee's website. The changes shall come into force from the moment the text of the Agreement is posted on the Licensee/Sublicensee's website.

4.3. Should the Licensor/Licensee fail to agree with the changes to the terms of this Agreement, the Licensor/Licensee is entitled to send a notice of withdrawal from this Agreement to the Licensee/Sublicensee. In the absence of a written notification from the Licensor/Licensee within 10 working days from the date of posting a new text of the Agreement on the Licensee/Sublicensee's website, changes shall be considered accepted by the Licensor/Licensee, and the Agreement shall remain valid as amended.

4.4. This Agreement may be terminated in the following cases:

4.4.1. by mutual agreement of the Parties at any time before the Work’s publication in the Journal;

4.4.2. by the Licensee/Sublicensee in cases provided for under this Agreement and by the law of the Russian Federation;

4.4.3. on other grounds provided for by the law of the Russian Federation.

4.5. It is impossible to withdraw from the Agreement after the Licensee/Sublicensee has accepted the Work for publication in the journal.

5. DISPUTE SETTLEMENT. LIABILITY

5.1. The Parties shall be liable for failure to perform or improper performance of their obligations under this Agreement as provided by the law of the Russian Federation.

5.2. In the event any claims are made against the Licensee/Sublicensee concerning the violation of exclusive rights to the intellectual property belonging to third parties committed during Work’s creation or in connection with the conclusion of this Agreement by the Licensor/Licensee, the Licensor/Licensee shall immediately, upon receipt of a notice from the Licensee/Sublicensee, take steps to resolve disputes with third parties and make every effort so that the Licensee/Sublicensee does not become a defendant to the case; reimburse the Licensee/Sublicensee for legal expenses, costs, and losses incurred in relation to the remedies and enforcement of the court’s order and the sums of money paid to a third party for violation of exclusive rights belonging to third parties, as well as other losses incurred by the Licensee/Sublicensee in relation to the Licensor/Licensee’s failure to fulfill his warranties under this Agreement.

5.3. All disputes arising under this Agreement shall be resolved by negotiation between the Parties, or, should the Parties fail to reach any agreement, shall be referred to the court at the location of the Licensee/Sublicensee.

6. FINAL PROVISIONS

6.1. This Agreement shall come into force as of the date of signing it and is valid until the expiration of the exclusive right.

6.2. In any matter not covered by this Agreement, the effective legislation of the Russian Federation shall be applied.

Privacy Statement

Please read this privacy statement carefully to understand our practices about how Natural Science Review ("Journal", "we") collects and uses your personal information.

Information We Collect

In order to access certain content and to make use of additional functionality and features of the Journal, and in order to be able to submit an article, we ask you to register for an account by completing and submitting a registration form. The types of personal information that the Journal collects directly from your input may include:

• full name;
• email address;
• postal address;
• country;
• place of work;
• ORCID ID;
• as well as anonymous visitor data, including cookies.

Use of Your Information

We may use your personal information to:

• provide you with access to the Journal's website;
• enable receipt, review, editing, production, and publication of articles in our Journal;
• respond to your requests and provide technical support;
• notify you about news that we believe may interest you, provided that you don’t opt out of receiving such communications.

Disclosure of Your Information

We do not transfer personal data to third parties, except in cases stipulated by the current legislation.

Access to and Accuracy of Your Information

The Journal may allow registered users to access their account information and make corrections or updates upon logging in at any time. The accuracy of such information is solely the responsibility of the user. If you request to deactivate your account or delete your personal information, we will endeavor to fulfill your request but some personal information may persist in backup copies for a certain period of time and may be retained as necessary for legitimate purposes or to comply with our legal obligations.

Changes to Our Privacy Policy

We may change this privacy policy from time to time. Any changes will be posted on this page with an updated revision date. Any changes will come into effect the next time you engage with us after the changes have been notified.

Cookie policy

HTTP cookies are small blocks of data created by a web server while a user is browsing a website and placed on the user's computer or other device by the user's web browser. Below we list the types of cookies that we use on this website, regardless of whether you have an account or not, and what purposes the cookies are used for.

Technical (essential) cookies:

These first-party cookies are used by our online publishing platform to store the individual user's preferences, such as language, and authenticate the logged-in users. These cookies cannot be turned off because they are essential for the correct functioning of the website.

Analytics cookies:

These cookies are created by the Matomo free open-source analytics platform deployed on JINR servers. This allows us to gather statistical data such as the geography of visitors, sources of traffic to the website, and user actions on the website (for example, visited pages). We do not share your information with any third parties.