1. General provisions. The Journal is committed to publish only original papers, not published elsewhere. The materials published in the Journal can be used by other mass media only with a written permission from the editorial office, the reference to the Journal being mandatory. The author’s rights are considered to be transferred to the editorial office as soon as the manuscript is received by the editorial office. All the manuscripts received by the editorial office are to be peer-reviewed by reputed scientists working in the field of knowledge discussed in the manuscript. The manuscript received by the editorial office is sent to a reviewer. In case of a negative review, the editorial board sends the manuscript to another peer reviewer. If the reviewers’ opinions differ, the editorial board sends the manuscript to the third peer reviewer. The reviews are discussed by the editorial board and govern the decision on manuscript acceptance/rejection. Manuscript formatting shall comply with the requirements.

2. Review time. A submitted manuscript is sent for peer review within a month from receipt. The reviewer submits the review to the editorial office within a month from his/her receipt of the manuscript. Within a month from receiving the review, the editorial board decides on publication, sending the manuscript to another reviewer, or rejection. If necessary, re-reviewing is performed within the same time limits. The reviews are e-mailed to corresponding authors without disclosing the reviewer’s identity. The editorial decision on manuscript acceptance or rejection is emailed to authors in the form of a reasoned opinion. The reviews are kept in the editorial office for 5 years.

3. Review requirements. The reviewer fills out the review form developed by the editorial office. The reviewer estimates the following characteristics of a manuscript: falling within the scope of the Journal; scientific contents; writing quality; topicality; scientific and/or practical significance; novelty of results; consistency of conclusion(s) with results achieved; abstract quality; the quality of abstract translation into English; consistency of References with the subject matter; formatting. The reviewer makes comments and recommendations on paper essence. The reviewer can additionally make comments, recommendations, and special opinions on the scientific content, writing, formatting, etc., of the manuscript by entering the text in the corresponding form fields. The reviewer provides a conclusion on the possibility/impossibility to publish the reviewed manuscript or the necessity to correct it and submit for re-review. The review is printed out by the reviewer, signed, and sent at the address of the editorial office by conventional mail or, as a scan copy, at dream-journal@mail.ru. The reviewers’ identities are not disclosed to authors or other people beyond the editorial board of the Journal. The review is provided to the authors for awareness without disclosing the reviewer’s identity.

S. V. Smirnov,                                                ______
   (name)                                                          (signature)

Prof., D. Eng.,
Editor-in-Chief of
Diagnostics, Resource and Mechanics
of materials and structures