«Eurasian Physical Technical Journal» registered in state mass media:
- Certificate No. 4382-G, 07.11.2003;
- Index 75240, “KazPost» № 09-1865, 5.12.2004
- Since 2008 the Eurasian Physical Technical Journal is included in the list of publications recommended by the Committee for Control in the Sphere of Education and Science of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan for publication of the main results of scientific activity in the field: Physics and Mathematics (in accordance with the changes as of April 27, 2015).
Karaganda State University named after E.A.Buketov
Head of the project – Kubeyev Yerkin Kinoyatovich
Editor-In-Chief – Sakipova Saule Erkeshevna
- Aringazin A.K., Institute for Basic Research, L.N.Gumilev Eurasian National University, Astana, Kazakhstan
- Dueck J., Erlangen-Nuernberg University, Erlangen, Germany
- Dzhumanov S., National University of Uzbekistan named after M. Ulugbek, Tashkent, Uzbekistan
- Epik E.Ya., Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, National Sciences Academy of Ukraine, Kiev, Ukraine
- Ibrayev N.Kh., Director of the Institute of Molecular Nanophotonics, Karaganda State University named after E.A.Buketov, Karaganda, Kazakhstan
- Jakovics A., Faculty of Physics and Mathematics, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
- Kidibaev M.M., Institute of Physical and Technical Problems and Material Engineering, Kyrgyz Academy of Sciences, Bishkek, Kyrgyz Kyrgyzstan
- Kumekov S.E., Director of the Engineering Institute of High Technologies Kazakh State National Technical University named after K.Satbaev, Almaty, Kazakhstan
- Kuritnyk I.P., professor of the Department of Electronics and Automation,
High school in Oswiecim, Poland
- Potapov A.A., A. Kotelnikov Institute of Radio Engineering and Electronics of RAS, Moscow, Russia
- Pribaturin N.A., Institute of Thermophysics named after S. Kutateladze, SB RAS, Novosibirsk, Russia
- Rahimov F.K., Tajik State National University, Dushanbe, Tajikistan
- Saulebekov A.O Kazakhstan Branch of Lomonosov Moscow State University, Astana, Kazakhstan
- Shrager E.R., National Research Tomsk State University, Tomsk, Russia
- Stoev M., South-West University «Neofit Rilski», Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria
- Zhanabaev Z.Zh., Al-Farabi Kazakh National State University, Almaty, Kazakhstan
- Omarov Hylysh Bejsenovich, – Pro-rector for Research, Doctor of Technical Sciences Professor
- Koketay Temirgali Abildinovich – Director of Institute of Technical Physics and Problems of Ecology, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor
- Nussupbekov Bekbolat Rakishevich – Dean of the Physico-Technical Faculty, candidate of Technical Sciences, Docent
- Sakipova Saule Erkeshevna – Editor in Chief of EAPhTJ
- Shсhanina Vera Nikolaevna – Director of KarSU Publishing House
Experts and Reviewers
- Agelmenev M.E., Doctor of Chemical Sciences, Professor, Karaganda State University named after E.A.Buketov, Karaganda, Kazakhstan
- Baktybekov K.S., Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Space Research Institute named after U.M.Sultangazin, Astana, Kazakhstan
- Bimurzaev S., Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Almaty University of Energy and Communications, Kazakhstan
- Grevtseva T.Y., Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Docent, Al-Farabi Kazakh National State University, Almaty, Kazakhstan
- Yershina A.K, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Kazakh State Women’s Pedagogical Institute, Almaty, Kazakhstan
- Kazhikenova S.Sh., Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor, Faculty of mathematics and information technology, Karaganda State University named after E.A.Buketov, Karaganda, Kazakhstan
- Koshumbaev M.B., Doctor of Technical Sciences, Academic IAI, Kazakhstan
- Narimanova G.N., Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Docent, Institute of Innovation, Tomsk State University of Control Systems and Radioelectronics, Russia
- Paleev D.Y., Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor, Coal Institute SB RAS, Kemerovo, Russia
- Scepanskis Mihails, Doctor PhD, researcher, Laboratory for Mathematical Modelling of Environmental and Technological Processes, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
- Suprun T., candidate of Technical Sciences, Senior Researcher, Institute of Engineering Thermophysics of NASU, Kyiv, Ukraine
- Trubitsyn A.A., Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Ryazan State Radio Engineering University, Russia
- Turmuhambetov A.Zh., Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, National Polytechnic University named after K.Satpayev, Kazakhstan
Akhmerova K.E., Kambarova Zh.T.,, E.A. Buketov Karaganda State University, Kazakhstan
Head of the project – Kubeyev Yerkin Kinoyatovich
Editor-In-Chief – Sakipova Saule Erkeshevna
Experts and Reviewers
Eurasian Physical Technical Journal published articles and original papers in English in various fields of Fundamental and Applied Physics that cover, but are not limited to, the following areas:
- Energy, Heat Physics: energy-saving technologies in the thermo-physics, power engineering and production; renewable energy, green energy.
- Hydro-aero-dynamics, Fluid and gas Mechanics
- Material Sciences: Condensed Matter Physics, New materials technology; Nanomaterials.
- Nonlinear physics and new technologies of radioengineering and electronics, telecommunication, astrophysics
- Modeling of the nonlinear physical processes
- Engineering, Devices and methods of physical experiment
- Ecological Aspects of Modern Technologies
Open Access Policy
«Eurasian Physical Technical Journal» provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
Peer Review Process
- All submitted to the editorial staff of «Eurasian Physical Technical Journal» papers will be pre-screened by Editor/ Deputy Editor to determine suitability for further review (e.g. correct format, area of interest). Paper deemed suitable if it will be peer-reviewed by at least two reviewers. Papers are subject to mandatory “single-blind” peer review (the reviewer knows the authors of the manuscript, but the authors do not know the reviewers). In case of delay, the reviewer may be substituted by another.
- Peer reviews carried out by invited reviewers who are leading experts in the corresponding field of physics. The decision on the choice of a reviewer for the examination of articles is accepted by the Editor-In-Chief / Deputy or Executive Editor of the scientific field. We aim to limit the review process to 2-4 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
- Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations:
- to accept the paper in its present state;
- to invited the author to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before final decision is reached;
- that final decision be reached following further reviewing by another specialist;
- to reject the manuscript outright.
- If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial staff would suggest the author either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably. Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 2 months and resubmit the adapted manuscript within this period for final evaluation.
- We politely request that the editor be notified verbally or in writing should the author decide to refuse from publishing the manuscript. In case the author fails to do so within 3 months since receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.
- If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
- The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.
- Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
- Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance, as final decision in all cases lies with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.
- Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 3 years.
Openness and Indexing
Since 2009 until now online versions of «Eurasian Physical Technical Journal» are included by several systems:
The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical relation by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the Author, the Journal Editor, the Peer Reviewer, the Publisher and the founded «Eurasian Physical Technical Journal» Scientific Society.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1. Publication decision
The Executive Editor of EAPhTJ is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, working on conjunction with the relevant society. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision
2.2. Fair play
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor and any editorial staff of «Eurasian Physical Technical Journal» must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
2.4.1 Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’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.
2.4.2 Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers
2.5. Vigilance over published record
An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.
2.6. Involvement and cooperation in investigations
An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. «Eurasian Physical Technical Journal» shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of «EAPhTJ» and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
3.4. Standard and objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
3.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
3.6.1 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.
3.6.2. 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.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1. Reporting standards
4.1.1 Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
4.2. Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
4.3. Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1 The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2 Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1 An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at http://www.elsevier.com
4.5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
4.6. Authorship of the Paper
4.6.1 Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4.7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.7.1 All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
4.7.2 Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.
4.8. Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor or publisher of «Eurasian Physical Technical Journal» to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper
5. Duties of the Publisher
5.1 «KarSU Publishing House» should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of «Eurasian Physical Technical Journal» in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
5.3. «KarSU Publishing House» should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
5.4 «KarSU Publishing House» should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.
The section is prepared according resources of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE – http://publicationethics.org/).
Thematic topics of «Eurasian Physical Technical Journal»
Open Access Policy
Peer Review Process