Preview

User

Not a user? Register with this site Forgot your password?

Informatics

Advanced search

Editorial Policies

Aim and Scope

Latest updates: 29.01.2026

The journal publishes original and review articles aimed at studying the current state of global science with the goal of improving the effectiveness of research management in computer science and information technology.

The primary goal of the peer-reviewed scientific and practical journal "Informatics" is to present new significant results of scientific and practical research by scientists and specialists from Belarus and other countries in the following areas:

  • theoretical foundations, models, and methods of informatics;
  • information technologies and systems in scientific research, medicine, industry, logistics, social services, and government;
  • mathematical modeling of objects, processes, and phenomena;
  • information reliability and security;
  • bioinformatics;
  • information technologies for product and process design;
  • robots, robotic, and human-machine systems;
  • artificial intelligence and intelligent systems;
  • digital signal processing, including image and speech;
  • space informatics.

The journal's main goals are:

  • to publish new significant scientific and practical results from projects and dissertations by scientists and postgraduate students from Belarus, neighboring countries, and beyond;
  • to engage leading Belarusian and international scientists and specialists in professional discussions on the development of informatics and the use of information technology;
  • to enhance the effectiveness of collaboration between scientists and practitioners in the field of informatics and information technology at the international level.

We invite Belarusian and international scientists, postgraduate students, and specialists working in computer science and information technology to publish in the journal.

 

Section Policies

BIOINFORMATICS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
SPACE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND GEOINFORMATICS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
LOGICAL DESIGN
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
ARTICLES ON THE MATERIALS CONFERENCE
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
SCIENTISTS OF BELARUS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
PARALLEL ARCHITECTURES AND COMPUTING
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
MATHEMATICAL MODELING
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
INFORMATION PROTECTION AND SYSTEM RELIABILITY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
INFORMATION
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Publication Frequency

4 issues per year

 

Open Access Policy

Latest updates: 29.01.2026

The journal provides direct open access to its content based on the following principle: free open access to research results facilitates the expansion of global knowledge sharing. Our open access policy complies with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition and means that articles are available online. This allows all users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full text of these articles, scan them for indexing, transfer them as data for software, or use them for any other lawful purpose without financial, legal, or technical barriers, except those associated with internet access.

After publication of an article in the journal, authors retain copyright without restriction. They may use the published article in the preparation of other publications, including books, educational and methodological publications, and use printed or electronic copies of the article for scientific, educational, and other purposes.

Journal materials are available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license.

 

Archiving

Russian State Library (RSL)

National Electronic Information Consortium (NEICON)

Scientific Electronic Library eLibrary.ru

 

Peer-Review

Latest updates: 29.01.2026

These regulations govern the review process for manuscripts submitted to the editorial board of the journal "Informatics."

Scientific peer review is a collaborative process that allows for an independent expert assessment of manuscripts submitted to the journal. The review is conducted by scholars and specialists in the same field of research as the submitted article. The assessment and criticism received through peer review provide authors with feedback to improve their work and, most importantly, allow them to assess the article's suitability for publication in the journal.

The article is registered with the journal's editorial board, and the accompanying documents are checked for compliance with the journal's profile, as well as with the formatting guidelines and author requirements. After the editor-in-chief or members of the editorial board have made a decision, the article is sent for review to one or, if necessary, two specialists in accordance with its scientific focus. All registered scientific articles undergo mandatory single-blind peer review (the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers, and the reviewers know the author's identity). Reviewer comments and suggestions must be objective and fundamental, aimed at improving the scientific quality of the manuscript.

Reasons for rejection of publication in the journal may include: the manuscript not being relevant to the journal's scope; lack of novelty in the results; failure to comply with the journal's authorship and ethical requirements; plagiarism; or data falsification.

Reviews are performed by independent experts—highly qualified specialists with professional knowledge and experience in the relevant field, holding an academic degree, and having no scientific, financial, or other relationship with the authors of the article or the journal's editorial board. The decision to select a reviewer for an article is made by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief, members of the editorial board, and the head of the editorial board. Manuscripts submitted to the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board are reviewed exclusively by external reviewers. Review of articles is voluntary, unpaid, and confidential. Reviewers are informed that submitted manuscripts are the intellectual property of the authors and contain confidential information. Reviewers are not permitted to make copies of the manuscript for their own use. A breach of confidentiality is possible only in the event of a claim of inaccuracy or falsification of the materials. The author of the work being reviewed is given the opportunity to review the text of the review.

A reviewer has the right to decline to review if there is a conflict of interest that affects the perception of the manuscript, or if the topic of the article does not correspond to their expertise.

The initial review of an article should not exceed two weeks. If changes are made to the article, the preparation time for each subsequent review is no more than 10 days. The number of revisions and reviews is unlimited. If the reviewer decides to resubmit the article for re-review, the author must make all necessary corrections and submit the final version of the manuscript to the editors within two weeks, along with a response to the reviewer. If the author fails to return the article and communicate their decision, the editors will remove it from consideration. In such situations, the authors are notified of the manuscript's retraction due to the expiration of the review period.

If the article is negatively reviewed, the reviewer must convincingly justify their conclusions. If the author disagrees with the reviewer's opinion, they have the right to submit a reasoned response to the journal's editors. In this case, the article may be sent for review to another specialist and will be re-examined based on several reviews from two experts, or submitted to the editors for consideration.

If the external review is positive, the article is discussed by the editorial board, at which the editor-in-chief presents the results of the review. The editorial board approves the list of articles for publication in the current issue of the journal and also has the right to reject an article if questions arise on certain aspects, or to send it for additional external review by appointing a reviewer.

Articles that fail to address the reviewer's key comments or that lack substantiated responses to their opinions are not accepted for publication. The journal's editorial board does not retain manuscripts that have not been accepted for publication.

A positive review is not sufficient grounds for publication. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board based on at least two reviews from one or two reviewers. In conflicting situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

After reviewing articles accepted for publication, the journal's editorial board conducts copy editing and typesetting, after which the article is sent to the author for approval. Original reviews are kept by the journal's editorial board for three years.

 

For reviewers

A single copy of the review must be prepared and sent by mail or email to the journal's editorial board.

Reviewers are asked to answer the following questions to thoroughly evaluate the manuscript:

  1. Main findings: Briefly summarize the essence of the study, as you understand it. 2. Validity: Are there any errors in the manuscript that prevent it from being published? If so, describe them.
  2. Originality and Significance: Assess the novelty of the results and their relevance to the field. If the results are not original, cite previously published work.
  3. Data and Methodology: Assess the research process, data quality, and presentation. Are the methods and data detailed enough to allow reproducibility?
  4. Data Analysis: Comment on the appropriateness of the use of statistics.
  5. Conclusions: Are the conclusions and interpretation of the data valid and reliable?
  6. Recommendations for Improvement: Suggest additional experiments or data to further explore the issue.
  7. References: Is the reference list complete and up-to-date? Suggest adding or deleting sources as needed.
  8. Clarity and Context: Assess how clearly the manuscript is presented and whether it meets the stated objectives.
  9. Boundaries of Expertise: Please indicate if any part of the manuscript is beyond your expertise or has not been fully assessed.

While reviewers are not required to strictly follow this procedure, their comments should be logical and cover all important aspects of the manuscript. Additional recommendations may be made in free form, including confidential comments for the editors.

 

Review Conclusion

The review conclusion should contain one of the following recommendations:

The article is recommended for publication in its current form.

The article is recommended for publication after correction of the deficiencies noted by the reviewer.

The article requires additional review by another specialist.

The article cannot be published in the journal (if it is not suitable for publication in this journal, or if the changes required are too significant to justify further consideration of the article in its current form).

 

Responsibilities of Reviewers

The reviewer informs the editors of any conflicts of interest (if any) before beginning work on the article. The reviewer does not disclose information about the article or the data contained therein to third parties.

The reviewer does not use information obtained from the article for personal or commercial purposes.

The reviewer does not draw conclusions about the quality of the article based on personal relationships with the author.

The reviewer uses only correct language and explanations regarding the article.

 

Indexation

Latest updates: 20.12.2021

The journal "Informatics" is included in the List of scientific publications of the Republic of Belarus for publishing the results of dissertation research. Articles published in the journal are also indexed in Russian international databases:

 

Publishing Ethics

Latest updates: 29.01.2026

Compliance with publication ethics requirements in the preparation and publication of "Informatica" concerns all participants in the editorial and publishing process—authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher—who create this journal. The journal's editorial board monitors compliance with ethical requirements, relying on guidelines prepared by international specialized organizations, associations, and publishing houses, as well as the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP). The primary documents the journal's editorial board relies on are the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics and the Declaration "Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications" adopted by ASEP.

Authorship

The journal "Informatics" adheres to the following criteria for authorship (developed and described in the ICMJE guidelines):

- substantial contribution to the conception or design of the research work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the work;

- drafting or critically revising the manuscript, adding valuable intellectual content;

- final approval of the published version of the manuscript;

- agreement to accept accountability for all aspects of the work and ensuring that any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work have been adequately investigated and resolved.

In addition to responsibility for those portions of the work for which the author contributed, the author should be aware of the co-authors' responsibilities for other specific components of the work. Authors should also demonstrate confidence in the integrity of their co-authors' contributions. All four of these criteria must be met and identified by the individuals listed as authors; the remaining acknowledgments are included in the Acknowledgments section.

Contributions of Authors and Non-Authors

The editorial board of the journal "Informatics" recommends that authors submit a statement of authorship, signed by all co-authors, along with their manuscript. By signing the statement, authors guarantee:

  • each author who signed the statement meets the authorship criteria set forth in the journal's ethical policy;

  • all individuals who participated in the study but are not authors are listed in the "Acknowledgments" section;

  • the contribution of each author is described in the article;

  • the authors take responsibility for the accuracy of the information provided.

Upon receipt of the article, the editor verifies that the author information and necessary documents are included.

Responsibility

Responsibility for upholding the rights of authorship and author contributions rests with the Editor-in-Chief of the journal "Informatics." Authors are required to provide accurate information about the authors of the article and anyone who made a significant contribution to the article's preparation.

If a manuscript is submitted to the journal "Informatics" by the Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor-in-Chief, or a member of the editorial board or editorial council, the manuscript will be reviewed only by external experts.

Disputes

If a dispute over authorship arises, work on the article is terminated, regardless of its current stage (review, peer review, editing, or pre-publication). All co-authors are informed of the authorship dispute.

The Editor-in-Chief of the journal "Informatics" has the right to specify a specific deadline within which authors may provide clarification on the requested issues. After this deadline, the article is retracted from publication with an appropriate explanation. If the article was published in Online First mode, the explanation for the retraction is made publicly available.

If a dispute arises regarding a published article, a correction, retraction, or retraction is published, stating the reason for the changes to the published document.

If it is necessary to add or remove a co-author before or after publication, the editorial board of the journal "Informatics" acts in accordance with the COPE guidelines:

Changes in authorship. Adoption of extra author - before publication

Changes in authorship: Removal of author – before publication.

To prevent manipulation of co-authorship, the editorial board of the journal "Informatics" uses COPE flowcharts and, when reviewing an article, pays attention to the following:

  • the study is indicated to have been funded by an organization whose authors are not listed. This requires a more thorough review of the contributions of all authors and, if necessary, requesting clarification from the corresponding author;

  • the list of authors includes scientists from another scientific field;

  • an individual is listed in the "Acknowledgments" section without specifying their contribution;

  • a very long or very short list of authors, atypical for the given scientific field or type of article;

  • an incomplete description of the authors' contributions: for example, a lack of information about who prepared the draft version of the manuscript or processed the data;

  • a check using "Antiplagiat" reveals that there is plagiarism from a dissertation whose author is not listed as an author;

  • articles on similar topics have been published by other groups of authors;

  • the list of authors suddenly changes during the article's publication without prior discussion with the journal's editorial board;

  • the author has published extensively, although their position (institute director) does not require such publication activity;

  • the corresponding author is unable to respond to reviewers' comments.

The editorial board of the journal "Informatics" hopes that organizations affiliated with the author will be willing to participate in the investigation of authorship disputes.

 

Complaints and Appeals

The editorial board of the journal "Informatics" carefully considers complaints regarding the conduct of editors and reviewers, which may concern issues such as breaches of confidentiality, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or misuse of confidential information obtained during the peer review process. Authors may also disagree with decisions regarding the expression of doubt on specific articles or complain about violations of editorial processes. All complaints can be sent to the editorial board by email; they will be reviewed in the usual manner. The complaint review process takes no more than 7 days. The complainant will receive information about the decision made, as well as the measures that will be taken and the timeframe for their implementation.

When reviewing complaints, the editorial board relies on COPE documents in each of the following cases:

  • handling post-publication criticism,

  • post-publication discussions and revisions,

  • suspected manipulation of post-publication peer review,

  • manipulation of images in a published article,

  • fabrication of data in a published article.

 

Conflict of Interest

This section has been prepared in accordance with WAME guidelines.

A conflict of interest is a situation in which individuals have competing or conflicting interests that could influence editorial decisions and the interpretation of data in a paper. Conflicts of interest can be potential, perceived, or actual. Objectivity can be affected by personal, political, financial, scientific, or religious factors.

Conflicts of interest may include the following:

• Financial: This conflict arises when a participant in the publication process has received or expects to receive money (or other financial benefits, such as patents or stock), gifts, or favors that could influence the work related to a specific publication. Examples include research fees, consulting fees, public speaking honoraria, etc.

• Personal Relationships: This conflict arises from personal relationships with family, friends, competitors, or former colleagues.

• Political and Religious Beliefs: Adherence to a particular religion or political party may influence the outcome of a paper that analyzes these issues. • Institutional Affiliation: This conflict arises when someone involved in the publication process is directly affiliated with an organization that has an interest in the publication.

The editors of the journal "Informatics" may request additional information from authors if necessary.

Conflicts of interest may affect authors, reviewers, and editors. The following policy statements are based on ICMJE recommendations.

 

When submitting a manuscript of any type or format, authors are required to disclose all relationships and activities that might influence, or be perceived to influence, their work. Authors must notify the editor of any actual or potential conflicts of interest by including the conflict of interest disclosure in the appropriate section of the article. If no conflict of interest exists, the author must disclose this with the following wording: "The author declares that he/she has no conflict of interest."

 

Reviewers must inform the editor of any conflict of interest that might bias their opinion of the manuscript and voluntarily recuse themselves from reviewing it if there is reason to believe they have bias. Reviewers must not use information about the work under review for their own benefit before it is published.

 

The editor-in-chief, who makes final decisions regarding manuscripts, must recuse themselves from editorial decisions if they have a conflict of interest or relationships that could create potential conflicts related to the articles under review. Editorial staff must not use information obtained while working with manuscripts for personal gain.

Articles by the journal's editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief, members of the editorial board, and the editorial council of the journal "Informatics" must clearly indicate their affiliation with the journal.

If an undisclosed conflict of interest is discovered in an unpublished or published article, the editorial board of the journal "Informatics" will act in accordance with COPE documents.

 

Data Reuse and Reproduction

This section of the policy is based on the COPE guidelines for data management.

 

Definition of Research Data

Research data includes any factual materials, whether digital or non-digital, recorded in any medium used to obtain research results. This includes tabular data, codes, images, documents, maps, processed and/or raw data. This policy applies to research data that may be required to support the validity of research results presented in articles published by the journal "Informatics." Research data includes information obtained directly by authors ("primary data"), as well as data from other sources analyzed by authors during the course of their research ("secondary data").

 

Definition of Exceptions

This policy does not apply to research data that are not required to support the validity of the results presented in published articles. Information about data that is not subject to disclosure may be shared as follows:

- placed in restricted-access research data repositories;

- pre-anonymized.

 

The author may also make publicly available only the metadata of the research data and/or a description of how to access it upon request from other scientists.

 

Data Storage

The preferred method of data sharing is through data repositories. For assistance choosing a repository for data storage, please refer to the list of repositories at  https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/.

 

Data Citation

The editorial board of Informatica Journal prefers to provide access to research data under open Creative Commons licenses and does not insist on the mandatory use of open licenses when data is stored in third-party repositories. The publisher of Informatica Journal does not claim ownership of research data provided by authors with their articles. Questions regarding compliance with this policy can be directed to the editorial board of Informatica Journal.

 

Ethical Oversight

Informatica Journal shares the COPE position that publication ethics includes not only ensuring the integrity and reliability of published research but also ethical behavior with respect to the subjects of the research. This category includes vulnerable populations, individuals (in the case of relevant research, those who are unable to protect their own interests), confidential data, and business/marketing practices.

 

Research in vulnerable populations should only be planned if these groups will benefit from the research.

 

Handling Confidential Data

The privacy of individuals or organizations involved in research is paramount and should not be violated without their informed consent. Authors must take all necessary precautions to protect the information of study participants.

 

Post-Publication Discussions and Revisions to Published Articles

In some cases, it may be necessary to make changes to a published article. The editors of Informatics support the practice of making revisions to published materials and, when necessary, follow COPE guidelines.

Any necessary revisions are accompanied by a notification after publication, which will always be linked to the original version of the article so that readers are informed of all necessary changes. The editors of Informatics use Expressions of Concern, Corrections, and Retractions. The purpose of this practice is to ensure the integrity of the scientific literature.

All Corrections, Expressions of Concerns, and Retractions are publicly available.

 

What should authors do if they discover an error in their article?

Authors may discover a technical or semantic error after publication of an article. In such cases, authors are required to notify the editors of the journal "Informatics" as soon as possible, especially if the error affects the interpretation of the results or casts doubt on the veracity of the information. The corresponding author is responsible for reaching agreement among the authors on further communication with the editors.

If changes to a published article are necessary, please contact the editors by email.

 

Corrections

Corrections are made to an article when it is necessary to correct an error or add missing information that does not affect the integrity or scientific significance of the article.

Corrections can be made, for example, to a figure caption, to add information about research funding, or to clarify information about a conflict of interest.

If such changes are made, a separate notice about the correction is published. The general procedure is as follows:

  • the correction is made to the original version of the article;

  • the Crossmark entry is updated;

  • a description of the change is added to the "Abstract" field of the original version of the article;

  • a notice about the correction is published, which contains information about the original version of the article, the names of the authors, a description of the correction, and links to it.

Notifications about the correction of spelling errors, typos, and other minor changes are not published separately. A notice indicating that corrections have been made to the article is provided on the website.

 

Article Retraction

The editorial board of the journal "Informatics" decides to retract an article in the following cases:

• when there is clear evidence that the results are unreliable for a number of reasons: there are serious calculation errors, the data has been fabricated, or the images have been manipulated;

• plagiarism has been detected in the article;

• the results have already been published in other journals and the author has not justified the need for republishing and has not notified the editors of this;

• the article contains materials and data for which permission to use has not been obtained;

• copyright has been violated or another serious legal issue has arisen (e.g., a breach of confidentiality);

• research ethics have been violated;

• the peer-review process has been compromised;

• the author has failed to disclose a conflict of interest that, in the editor's opinion, could have influenced the reviewer's or editor's decision to publish the article. If a retraction of an article is necessary, the editorial board of the journal "Informatics" undertakes to:

• conduct an investigation and ensure that a retraction is necessary;

• prepare a retraction notice: include the note "Article Retracted" and the article title, describe the reason for the retraction, indicate who initiated the retraction, and provide a link to the retracted article;

• publish the retraction notice;

• replace the original version of the retracted article, noting in the PDF file that the article has been retracted;

• report the retraction to databases;

• submit information about the retraction to the Retracted Articles Database.

The editorial board of the journal "Informatics" processes retracted articles in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

 

Expressing Concerns

The editorial board of the journal "Informatics" announces an expression of concern if serious concerns have been raised about a published article, but the investigation has failed to prove anything, or for some reason the investigation will not be conducted or cannot be completed for an extended period. Readers must be notified of the situation as soon as possible. After the investigation is completed, the article may be amended or retracted.

 

Article Removal

Articles from the journal "Informatics" are removed only in extreme cases, when it is impossible to follow the protocol for making changes, retracting an article, or expressing concerns.

An article may be removed in the following cases:

  • if dissemination of the article could pose a serious risk;

  • if the article contains content that violates the privacy rights of a research participant;

  • if the article violates rights;

  • if the article is subject to removal by court order.

If an article is removed, all materials are removed from the journal's website, queries are sent to databases requesting removal of the full text, and a notice regarding the article's removal is posted.

 

Article Updates and Post-Publication Discussions

An author may need to supplement an article some time after its publication. In this case, the editorial board of the journal "Informatics" may publish a supplement to the article, which is reviewed by the editors and may be sent for peer review. When a supplement is published, the file containing the original version of the article is updated, and a notice of the supplement is placed in the current issue of the journal, including information about the article, its authors, the nature of the changes, and a link to the article.

Comments on a published article are short comments expressing opinions or observations regarding the published article. They are sent to the reviewers and authors of the article so that they have the opportunity to prepare a response.

The author's comment is also sent to the reviewer. The author will have the opportunity to respond to the authors again, after which correspondence between the author and the authors of the article may continue privately.

The decision to publish comments is made by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal "Informatics." Comments, replies, and retorts are linked to the original version of the article to which they relate.

Editorial Board Formation Principles

The editorial board of the journal "Informatics" is guided by the COPE principles when forming its editorial board/council.

Potential members of the editorial board/council may be recommended to the editor-in-chief by current members of the editorial board/council, reviewers, and authors.

Scientists wishing to participate in the journal as a member of the editorial board/council may submit an application to the editor-in-chief.

Editorial board/council member responsibilities:

  • publishing two articles per year to support the journal;

  • reviewing incoming manuscripts in their area of ​​expertise and in the absence of external reviewers. Each editorial board/council member receives no more than two manuscripts per year for review. Review must be conducted in accordance with the approved Review Policy of the journal "Informatics."

  • selecting reviewers for incoming articles at the request of the executive secretary, overseeing the review process for incoming articles.

  • making decisions on the publication of an article after all review stages. These decisions are communicated to the editor-in-chief, who makes the final decision on publication.

  • inviting authors and reviewers to collaborate with the journal.

A member of the editorial board/council may be dismissed from their position for the following reasons:

  • Violation of publication ethics: concealment of a conflict of interest, information, or use of their status for personal gain;

  • Failure to perform assigned duties for a year without good cause and without the consent of the editor-in-chief;

  • At the request of the editorial board/council member.

Privileges of a member of the editorial board/council of the journal "Informatics":

  • Articles by a member of the editorial board/council are reviewed on a priority basis;

  • Information about the member of the editorial board/council is posted on the journal's website, along with the necessary links to their database profiles, affiliations, and other data.

The possibility of potential candidates for membership in the editorial board/council is considered at regular meetings of the editorial board/council.

The final decision on the inclusion of a potential candidate in the editorial board/council is made by the editor-in-chief.

Responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal "Informatics"

The Editor-in-Chief is personally and independently responsible for deciding whether to publish an article and makes the final decision on publication.

The Editor-in-Chief is guided by the journal's policies when reviewing an article and deciding whether to publish it.

The Editor-in-Chief may discuss the article and reviewer comments with other editors and reviewers, provided these discussions are justified and legitimate, and without using the materials discussed for personal gain.

The Editor-in-Chief is obligated to evaluate the content of the manuscript regardless of the origin, citizenship, or political leanings of the authors.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure confidentiality is maintained and not disclose information about the manuscript to third parties (except other journal editors, reviewers, and the publisher/founder) unless necessary. The Editor-in-Chief is obligated to inform the editorial board of all conflict situations, as well as the discovery of critical errors or accusations of violations of publication ethics by authors or reviewers submitted to the journal, so that appropriate action can be taken in such cases, including amendments, publication of retractions, retractions, and expression of concerns.

The Editor-in-Chief participates in the investigation of any ethical violations related to manuscripts under review and published articles and makes every effort to resolve conflicts as quickly as possible. If necessary, the Editor-in-Chief collaborates with the author's institution to conduct a more in-depth investigation.

 

Founder

  • The United Institute of Informatics Problems of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus (UIIP NASB)

 

Author fees

Latest updates: 29.01.2026

Publishing in the journal is free for authors.

The editors do not charge authors for the preparation, publication, or printing of materials.

Sources of Income

Funding for the journal "Informatics" comes from subscriptions and the founder's funds.

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Latest updates: 24.02.2021

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Reviewers should not consider 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 papers.

 

Plagiarism detection

Latest updates: 20.12.2021

«Informatics» use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.

 

Self-archiving policy

Latest updates: 20.12.2021

Preprint and Postprint Deposition Policy

In the process of submitting an article, the author must confirm that the article has not been published or has not been accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When referring to an article published in the journal «Informatics», the publisher asks to post a link (the full URL of the material) to the official website of the journal. Articles previously published by the authors on personal or public websites that are not related to other publishers are allowed to be considered.

Preprints

The editorial board of the «Informatics» encourages uploading preprints on preprint servers. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines a preprint as 'a scholarly manuscript posted by the author(s) in an openly accessible platform, usually before or in parallel with the peer review process.' 

A preprint publication shall not be considered duplicate publication nor shall it influence the editor's decision to publish it in the «Informatics».

The author must notify the editorial board of the «Informatics» about the posted preprint at submission of the manuscript for review, furnishing a link to the preprint with its DOI identifier and the dissemination terms and conditions.

It is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published manuscript in the preprint record. The link must contain the DOI and the URL of the article published on the journal's website. The original preprint should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The preprint should not be replaced with the text of the published article, do not delete the preprint text.

Manuscripts Accepted for Publication

The editorial board of the «Informatics» allows manuscripts that have been reviewed and are accepted for publication to be archived independently.

 This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:

  • personal website or blog;
  • institutional repository;
  • disciplinary repository;
  • direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.

The text of the manuscript should contain the author’s clarifications about its status and information about the planned publication.

Example: The ARTICLE TITLE has been reviewed, accepted for publication, and will be published in 2021, Т.18, № 4 of the «Informatics».

Final Versions of Manuscripts

The editorial board of the «Informatics» allows manuscripts that have been peer-reviewed, accepted for publication, edited and ready for publication (proofread and typeset) to be archived independently.

Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.

 

For Reviewers

Latest updates: 20.12.2021

Scientific review is a collaborative process that allows to arrange independent evaluation of manuscripts submitted to a journal. The examination is carried out by scientists and specialists in the same field of research as the presented article. The evaluation and criticism obtained as a result of a review provides the authors with the opportunity for feedback to improve their work and, most importantly, allow the editor to evaluate the suitability of the article for publication in the journal.

The journal "Informatics" uses mandatory one-way “blind” peer review: reviewers know who the author is, while authors do not know who the reviewer is. The identity of the reviewer can be disclosed solely at his request.

The letter with a request for review contains a file with the text of the article, additional materials, if necessary, as well as the contact details of the editorial board and the deadline for submitting the review.

The terms of reviewing in each individual case may change taking into account the creation of conditions for the most objective assessment of the quality of the materials provided, but should not exceed one month for the initial decision-making. When finalizing the article, the preparation time for each subsequent review is no more than 10 days. The number of improvements and reviews is not limited.

In case if the  review is not submitted in proper time  the reviewer returns the article and another reviewer should be chosen.

The review is made in writing in one copy and sent by post mail or by e-mail to the editorial office of the journal.

 

Responsibility of reviewers

  • The reviewer evaluates his employment before agreeing to the examination of the manuscript and agrees to the review only if reviewer has sufficient time to make a quality review.
  • The reviewer warns the editors about the presence of a conflict of interest (if any) before starting to work with the article.
  • The reviewer does not transfer information about the article and the data that it contains to third parties.
  • The reviewer does not use the information obtained from the article for personal and commercial purposes.
  • The reviewer does not draw conclusions about the quality of the article based on a personal relationship to the author.
  • The reviewer uses only correct expressions and explanations regarding the article.

 

Reviewer Tips

Read the contents of the journal "Informatics" and the rules for authors.

Visit the journal's website https://inf.grid.by to get an idea of the content of the publications. This will help you to decide if the article in question is suitable for the journal or not.

See the guidelines for authors to check if the article meets the journal submission criteria (for example, topic, scope, and presentation).

The reviewer has the right to refuse to review the article (in particular, if the subject of the article does not correspond to reviewer’s profile). If refused, the reviewer may suggest other candidates as possible reviewers of this article.

 

Review requirements

The review must evaluate:

  • originality of the article;
  • correspondence of the article to the subject of the journal;
  • relevance of the research topic;
  • formulation of the research goal and clarity of its presentation;
  • the validity of the conclusions;
  • completeness of links;
  • structure and accessibility of the presented material.

 

Essential questions to consider when reading a manuscript

  • Does the article contribute to the expansion or further study of this topic?
  • Does the title of the article correspond to its content?
  • Does the abstract reflect the main content of the work and the results obtained?
  • Does the keywords selected reflect the contents and is their number sufficient?
  • Are abbreviations and other conditional letters explained in the text of the article at the first mention?
  • Do the bibliographic descriptions of the cited literature correspond to the current state of the problem considered by the author?
  • Does the article correspond to modern achievements (what is its scientific contribution) in the field of knowledge to which it belongs?
  • Is the article accessible to the readers for whom it is intended, in terms of language, style, material arrangement, clarity of tables, diagrams, figures and formulas?
  • Is the work completed? Is the material presented in a structured way?
  • Should the article be shortened or the presentation form revised?
  • Are there any plagiarism in the article - borrowing parts of someone else's text, quotations, tables, formulas, graphs, etc. without reference to the author and the original sources? Is it advisable to publish an article taking into account already published works on this issue? Does the article contain advertising information?
  • What exactly are the positive sides, as well as the shortcomings of the article, what corrections and additions should be made by the author?

 

Conclusion of the review

The conclusion of the review should contain one of the following recommendations:

  • The article is recommended for publication in its present form.
  • The article is recommended for publication after correcting the deficiencies noted by the reviewer.
  • The article needs additional reviewing by another specialist.
  • The article cannot be published in the journal (if it is not suitable for publication in this particular journal, or if the changes that need to be made are too significant to continue to consider the article in its current form). In this case, the author can be offered to Resubmit the article after its revision.

Comments in the review

It is helpful to provide detailed comments in the review:

  • comments should be written in a form that is understandable and suitable for transmission to the authors, in order to obtain clarifications on any unclear issues when finalizing the article;
  • it is recommended to make suggestions on what the author needs to do to improve the presentation of the material, the quality of the general presentation of the article;
  • be sure to confirm that the topic of the article is interesting enough and the volume of the article is justified;
  • if it is recommended to shorten the article, then the author (s) would like to know which sections should be shortened;
  • editing   English language is not the task of the reviewer, but it will be useful to correct obvious errors if they hinder understanding of the meaning of the text;
  • constructive criticism is encouraged; comments should be carefully formulated so that the author clearly understands what changes or additions should be made to improve the article;
  • the volume of the review is not limited;
  • if the article is returned to the author for revision, the reviewer may be asked to give a second review of the revised version of the article.

Note

When making changes to their article, authors are invited to submit a list of changes and any comments for transmission to reviewers. The revised version is usually returned to the first reviewer, who must confirm whether are happy agrees with the changes.

 

Crossmark Policy

Latest updates: 20.12.2021

CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of an article or other published content. By applying the CrossMark logo, journal «Informatics» 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

 

Data sharing policy

Authors are encouraged to provide research data confirming their publications, but this is not necessary and will not affect the decision to publish.

Definition of research data

This policy applies to research data that will be required to verify the results of research presented in articles published in the journal "Informatics". Research data includes information obtained directly by the authors ("primary data"), as well as data from other sources analyzed by the authors during the study ("secondary data"). Research data includes any registered factual material that is used to obtain results in digital and non-digital form. These include tabular data, code, images, audio and video files, maps, processed and/or raw data.

Definition of exceptions

This policy does not apply to research data that is not required to confirm the reliability of the results presented in the published articles. Data that is not subject to disclosure can be transferred as follows: placed in research data repositories with limited access; previously anonymized. The author can also publicly provide only metadata and/or a description of how to access them at the request of other scientists.

Data repositories

The preferred way to exchange data is to use data repositories. If you need help choosing a repository for hosting data, you can contact the site https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org /.

Data citation

Latest updates: 20.12.2021

"Informatics" prefers to provide access to research data on the terms of free Creative Commons licenses. The editorial board of the Informatics journal does not insist on the mandatory use of free licenses when data is placed in third-party repositories, and does not claim ownership of the research data provided by the author along with the article. Questions regarding compliance with this policy are sent directly to the editorial office of the Informatics journal. 

 

Policy on the Use of Generative AI

Latest updates: 23.01.2026

In light of the development of generative artificial intelligence and AI-based technologies, which are frequently employed by authors when writing scientific articles, the editorial board of the journal "Informatics" has developed a policy regulating their use. The editorial board will monitor advances in this field and revise its policy as necessary.

The rules for the use of generative AI and AI-based tools in scientific publications apply exclusively to the writing process and do not concern the use of AI for data analysis or obtaining scientific results during research.

Authors may use generative AI and AI-based tools solely to enhance the readability and linguistic quality of their manuscripts. Such tools must be used under the author's supervision, and their output must be carefully reviewed and edited. It is important to understand that AI may generate text that appears authoritative but contains inaccuracies, incomplete information, or biased judgments.

Authors are fully responsible for the content of their work. The use of AI tools must be disclosed in the manuscript, and this information will be included in the published article for clarity.

AI-based tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship implies responsibility and the performance of tasks that only humans can perform. Authors must ensure that their work is original, complies with ethical standards, and does not infringe the rights of third parties.

The use of generative AI or its tools to create, modify, or process images in manuscripts is prohibited. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, and color balance are permitted only if they do not distort the presented data.

If the use of AI is part of the research methodology (e.g., in biomedical imaging), this should be described in detail in the Methods section, including the name and characteristics of the AI tool used.

Manuscripts under review are confidential documents, and uploading them or parts of them to AI tools is prohibited, as this may violate the authors' privacy and intellectual property rights.

This rule also applies to review comments, which may contain confidential information about the manuscript and its authors. Similarly, the use of generative AI for editorial decisions is prohibited. Manuscript evaluation requires critical thinking and an objective approach, which only human editors can provide. Editors are ultimately responsible for the editing process, making final decisions on manuscripts, and communicating these decisions to authors.

The use of generative AI to assist in peer review of scientific papers is not permitted, as the peer review process requires critical thinking and independent judgment, which are beyond the capabilities of AI. Reviewers are solely responsible for the content of their reviews.

The journal allows the use of safe AI technologies for tasks such as checking manuscript completeness, detecting plagiarism, and finding suitable reviewers, subject to confidentiality standards.



220012, Minsk, Surganov Str 6.
The United Institute of Informatics Problems
of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus
(UIIP NASB)
e-mail: rio@newman.bas-net.by

supported by NEICON (Ejournal lab)