Inorganic Materials: Applied Research

Inorganic Materials: Applied Research publishes English translations of articles devoted to applied aspects of inorganic materials selected from four Russian periodicals: 

• Materialovedenie, 
• Perspektivnye Materialy, 
• Fizika i Khimiya Obrabotki Materialov, and 
• Voprosy Materialovedeniya. 

The source of each article is described at the article level on the title pages. The peer review policies and ethical principles are the same for all Russian-language journals. The selection for Inorganic Materials: Applied Research is made by the Editor-in-Chief. The journal welcomes manuscripts from all countries.

PEER REVIEW

Inorganic Materials: Applied Research contains translations of research articles devoted to applied aspects of inorganic materials. Papers are selected from Russian journals: Materialovedenie, Perspektivnye Materialy, and Fizika i Khimiya Obrabotki Materialov.

Materialovedenie is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single blind peer review format. The average period from submission to first decision is 58 days. The average rejection rate for submitted manuscripts is 4%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.

Perspektivnye Materialy is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single blind peer review format. The average period from submission to first decision is 30 days. The average rejection rate for submitted manuscripts is 15%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.

Fizika i Khimiya Obrabotki Materialov is a peer reviewed journal. We use a double blind peer review format. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review (i) any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors, (ii) anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.