Publication ethics

General Ethical Principles

The journal «Contemporary Problems in Metallurgy» adheres to standards of publication ethics and research integrity. Our editorial policy is based on the principles of transparency, objectivity and fairness, and we strive to ensure integrity at every stage of the publication process.
We strictly adhere to the recommendations and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which is the world’s leading organisation in the field of scientific publication ethics. All authors, reviewers and editors involved in the journal’s work are required to familiarise themselves with and adhere to these standards, as well as all relevant laws and regulations, in particular the Code of Conduct and Guidelines for Best Practice of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The journal «Contemporary Problems of Metallurgy» actively combats any instances of academic misconduct and ensures the prompt and transparent handling of any complaints or concerns relating to the ethical aspects of publication. Our aim is to uphold trust in scientific research and ensure that only reliable and ethically sound material is published.

Duties and responsibilities of the editorial board and editors
The editorial board comprises the editor-in-chief, the deputy editor-in-chief and the editors.
Editorial activities relating to the journal’s content, the article selection process and peer review are independent and free from the influence of organisations supporting the journal.
The editorial board and its members are responsible for deciding on the publication of articles submitted to the journal. The editorial board is guided by editorial policy and is bound by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
The editorial board reserves the right to refuse to publish submitted manuscripts if it is determined that they do not meet the relevant standards regarding content and formal aspects. The editorial staff will notify authors of the results of the manuscript review within 60 days of the date of its submission to the editorial office.
Editors must not have a conflict of interest regarding the articles they are considering for publication. If an editor believes there is a potential conflict of interest in connection with the review of a submitted article, the selection of reviewers and all decisions regarding the manuscript shall be made by the deputy editor-in-chief or the editorial board, who shall evaluate manuscripts on the basis of their scientific content, without any racial, gender, sexual, religious, ethnic or political bias.
Editors and editorial staff must not use unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts without the authors’ written consent. Information and ideas presented in submitted manuscripts must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain.
Editors and editorial staff must take all reasonable measures to ensure the anonymity of reviewers to authors before, during and after the evaluation process, as well as the anonymity of authors to reviewers until the review procedure is complete.

Authors’ duties and responsibilities
Authors guarantee that their manuscript is their original work, that it has not been previously published and is not under consideration for publication in other journals. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to another journal constitutes a breach and will result in the manuscript being excluded from consideration by the journal.
Please note that posting preprints on servers or in preprint repositories is not considered prior publication. Authors must disclose details of the preprint’s posting when submitting their manuscript. This should include a link to the preprint’s location. Upon publication of the manuscript, authors must update the information relating to the preprint version on the server/preprint repository to indicate that the final version has been published in the journal, including the DOI that links directly to the publication.
If the manuscript has previously been submitted elsewhere, authors must provide information about the previous peer-review process and its results. This gives authors the opportunity to describe in detail how previous reviews were taken into account in subsequent revisions and why some reviewers’ comments were not incorporated. Information about the author’s previous peer-review experience is an advantage for the author: it often helps editors to select the right reviewers.
If the submitted manuscript is the result of a research project or if a previous version was presented at a conference as an oral presentation (under the same or a similar title), detailed information about the project, conference, etc. should be provided in the notes or in the «Acknowledgements» section of the manuscript.
Each author is responsible for ensuring that manuscripts submitted to the journal are written in accordance with ethical standards. Authors confirm that the manuscript does not contain unfounded or unlawful claims and does not infringe the rights of third parties. The publisher shall not be held legally liable in the event of any claims for damages.

Reporting Standards
The journal «Contemporary Problems in Metallurgy» aims to serve the research community by ensuring that all articles contain sufficient information for the work to be replicated by other researchers. Submitted manuscripts must contain sufficient detail and references to enable reviewers, and subsequently readers, to verify the claims presented therein.
The deliberate presentation of false claims constitutes a breach of ethical standards.
Our aim is to ensure:
       - Transparency: clear and complete disclosure of all details of the research.
       - Reproducibility: provision of sufficient information to enable other researchers to repeat the experiment or analysis and obtain similar results.
       - Verifiability: the ability for reviewers and readers to assess the validity and soundness of the claims presented.
Reporting standards require authors to:
       - A complete and accurate description of the methods: this includes details of materials, equipment, experimental conditions, statistical methods, software, timeframes, data collection procedures, etc.
       - Clear presentation of data: providing information on what data was collected and how, how it was processed, what exclusions were made, and what limitations existed.
       - Comprehensive results: presenting in articles not only significant results, but also those that may be considered uninformative, provided they are important for understanding the study.
       - Disclosure of all relevant details: provide all details of the study that may be critical to its reproducibility.
Authors bear sole responsibility for the content of their materials and must ensure they have permission from all parties involved to publish this content. Authors also bear sole responsibility for the content of their data/supplementary files. Authors confirm that data protection regulations, ethical standards, third-party copyright and other rights were observed during the collection, processing and sharing of data.
Authors wishing to include figures, tables or other material previously published in other sources must obtain permission from the copyright holder(s). Any material received without such confirmation will be deemed to originate from the authors.

Inclusive language
The journal «Contemporary Issues in Metallurgy» promotes the use of accessible and inclusive language to ensure that research is widely understood and that respect is shown to all individuals without exception.
To ensure accessibility, authors should:
       - use clear, simple language that is understandable to representatives of various disciplines and to those for whom Ukrainian and/or English are not their native languages;
       - avoid overly technical or unnecessary terminology, excessive complexity, long sentences, repetitions, uncommon abbreviations and acronyms, stereotypes, idiomatic expressions, slang and cultural assumptions;
       - explain technical terms where necessary;
       - use inclusive language, respect diversity and avoid implying the superiority of any group on the basis of gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, disability, health status, age or socio-economic background.

Authorship
Authors must ensure that only those who have made a significant contribution to the creation of the material are listed as authors, and conversely, that all those who have made a significant contribution to the creation of the material are listed as authors. If other individuals were involved in important aspects of the research project and the preparation of the manuscript, their contribution should be acknowledged in a footnote or in the «Acknowledgements» section.
To be included in the list of authors of a manuscript, the following five criteria must be met:
       1. make a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or make a substantial contribution to the collection, analysis or interpretation of the data for the work;
       2. contribute to the drafting of the work, or critically review it in terms of its intellectual content;
       3. give final approval of the version to be published;
       4. agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are properly investigated and resolved;
       5. agree to be listed as an author and approve the final list of authors.
The addition or removal of authors during the editorial process is permitted only if a reasonable explanation is provided to the journal’s editorial board and the publisher. Attempts to introduce «ghost», «gift» or «honorary» authorship will be regarded as cases of academic misconduct.

Citation Policy
Authors must ensure that, where material is taken from other sources (including their own published works), the source is clearly cited and that appropriate permission has been obtained.
Authors must not engage in excessive self-citation of their own works.
Authors should not predominantly cite their own publications or those of their friends, colleagues or institutions.
Authors should not cite advertisements or promotional materials.
Editors and reviewers should not ask authors to include citations solely for the purpose of increasing the number of citations to their own work or that of a colleague, or to a journal or other publication with which they are associated.
In accordance with COPE’s recommendations, we expect that «original wording taken directly from other researchers» publications should be placed in quotation marks with appropriate citations’. This requirement also applies to the author’s own work. COPE has produced a discussion paper on citation manipulation with recommendations for best practice.
Plagiarism, data fabrication and image manipulation

Plagiarism is unacceptable in the journal.
Plagiarism includes copying text, ideas, images or data from another source, even from your own publications, without citing the original source.
Any text copied from another source must be placed in quotation marks, and the original source must be cited. If the study design, structure or language of the manuscript builds on previous research, such research must be cited.
All submitted materials are checked for plagiarism using the Turnitin web service. If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript must be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after the article has been published, an investigation will be conducted and measures will be taken in accordance with the journal’s policy on article retraction.
Image files must not be altered or manipulated in any way that could lead to a misinterpretation of the information contained in the original image.
If deliberate and incorrect manipulation of an image (or images) is detected and confirmed during the peer review process, the editor must reject the manuscript.
If manipulation of an image (or images) is detected and confirmed after the article has been published, action will be taken in accordance with the journal’s retraction policy.
All research data presented in the manuscript in the form of text, images or tables must be original. Data must not be improperly selected, altered, enhanced or fabricated. This includes:
       – omitting data points to enhance the significance of conclusions;
       – falsifying data;
       – selecting results that support a specific conclusion whilst disregarding contradictory data;
       – deliberately choosing analytical tools or methods to support a specific conclusion.

Conflict of interest
Conflicts of interest (also known as «competing interests») arise when matters unrelated to the research could reasonably be perceived as influencing the neutrality or objectivity of the work or its evaluation. This can occur at any stage of the research cycle, including during experiments, whilst writing the manuscript, or during the process of turning the manuscript into a published article.
If authors are unsure, they should declare a potential conflict of interest or discuss it with the editorial team. Undeclared conflicts of interest may result in sanctions. Articles with an undeclared conflict of interest will be rejected by the editors. If a conflict of interest is identified after publication, measures will be taken in accordance with the journal’s policy on retraction.
Conflicts of interest do not always prevent the publication of a paper or participation in the peer review process. However, they must be declared in the relevant section of the article, «Conflict of Interest». A clear description of all potential conflicts – regardless of whether they had an actual impact or not – allows others to make informed decisions regarding the work during its review.
Declared conflicts of interest will be considered by the editor and reviewers and included in the published article.

Fundamental errors in published works
If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they are obliged to notify the journal’s editorial board immediately and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article.
By submitting a manuscript, authors agree to comply with the editorial policy of the journal «Contemporary Problems of Metallurgy».

ORCID
The journal strongly encourages all authors submitting an article to register an account with Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID). ORCID numbers for all authors and co-authors must be included in the author details when submitting a manuscript and will be published alongside the submitted article if it is accepted.
ORCID registration provides a unique and permanent digital identifier for an account, ensuring accurate attribution and improving the discoverability of published articles, thereby guaranteeing that the correct author receives due recognition for their work.

Funding information
If the article is the result of a funded project, authors are required to disclose the sources of funding in accordance with their contracts with the funding organisation. Within the manuscript, information on funding must be presented as a separate section entitled «Funding» located after the main text of the article and before the reference list.

Duties and responsibilities of reviewers
Reviewers are required to provide timely, competent and impartial written feedback on the scientific value and significance of manuscripts.
Reviewers assess the manuscript for its suitability to the journal’s scope, the relevance of the research topic and the methods used, the originality and scientific significance of the information presented in the manuscript, the style of presentation, and the scientific apparatus.
Reviewers must inform the Editor of any reasonable suspicions or known potential breaches of ethical standards by the authors. Reviewers must point out relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors and inform the Editor of any substantial similarities between the manuscript under review and any manuscript published or under consideration for publication elsewhere, if they are aware of such. Reviewers must also inform the Editor of any parallel submission of the same manuscript to another journal, if they are aware of this.
Reviewers must not have any conflict of interest regarding the research, the authors and/or the sources of funding for the research. If such conflicts exist, reviewers must immediately notify the Editor.
A selected reviewer must decline to review if they:
       – have a recent publication or patent for an invention with the authors (or one of the authors) of the manuscript;
       – are collaborating or have recently collaborated with the authors (or one of the authors) of the manuscript;
       – has a close personal relationship with the authors (or one of the authors) of the manuscript;
       – has a financial interest in the subject matter;
       – feels unable to be objective;
       – lacks the appropriate qualifications to review the research described in the manuscript;
       – is unable to review the manuscript within the specified timeframe.
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers must clearly express their views, supporting them with arguments.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not use unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts without the authors’ explicit written consent.
Information and ideas presented in submitted manuscripts must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain.
The journal employs a double-blind peer review process. Reviewers must take care not to reveal their identity to authors in their comments.

Use of large language models and generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools
The journal «Contemporary Problems in Metallurgy» adheres to the recommendations of the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) regarding chatbots, ChatGPT and scientific manuscripts, as well as the position of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding authorship and AI tools.
Large language models (LLMs) and generative artificial intelligence tools (such as ChatGPT, DeepSeek, Microsoft Copilot, etc.) cannot be listed as authors of an article.
Authors must clearly state in the manuscript any use of tools based on large language models and generative AI for generating data or code, or for collecting, processing, analysing or interpreting data (specifying which tool was used and for what purpose) in the «Methods» or «Acknowledgements» sections. Photographs, videos or illustrations created wholly or partly using generative artificial intelligence are not acceptable. The use of non-generative machine learning tools to manipulate, combine or enhance existing images or drawings must be disclosed in the relevant caption when submitting the manuscript so that a case-by-case assessment can be made. Concealing the use of AI tools is unethical. The use of AI-based tools for editing and spell-checking does not need to be declared. The results of AI work should not be cited as primary sources to support specific claims.
Editors and reviewers must ensure the confidentiality of the editorial and peer-review processes. Editors must not share information about submitted manuscripts or peer-review reports with any tools based on large language models or generative AI. Reviewers must not use any tools based on large language models and generative AI to produce review reports. Concealing the use of AI tools is unethical and undermines the transparency of editorial work and peer review. The editorial and peer-review processes are confidential, and the use of AI tools on a manuscript renders it public, breaching the principle of confidentiality, disclosing confidential information publicly and jeopardising transparency.

Handling complaints and appeals
Readers who have comments or complaints about published articles should first contact the relevant author to try to resolve the issue directly before contacting the editorial office.
The editorial office may be contacted in cases where contacting the authors is not appropriate, if the authors have not responded, or if the issue has not been resolved.
The editorial board should also be contacted in cases where a complaint or enquiry concerns breaches of academic integrity and/or publication ethics.
Complaints and appeals concerning breaches of academic integrity by participants in the publication process (authors, reviewers, members of the editorial board) will be considered in accordance with the Law of Ukraine «On Academic Integrity» from the moment it comes into force. Violations of academic integrity subject to review include, in particular: academic plagiarism (Article 24), fabrication (Article 27), falsification (Article 28), misattribution of authorship (Article 25), unethical use of results generated by artificial intelligence (Article 29), as well as unethical assessment (Article 30). If a violation is confirmed, the editorial board shall apply the remedial measures provided for in Article 19 of the Law: refusal to publish, retraction of the article with mandatory disclosure of the reason, and notification of the management of the institution where the offender (or offenders) works or studies, for the application of sanctions provided for by law (Articles 22–36).
The Editorial Board adheres to the principles governing responses to breaches of academic integrity, as set out in Article 20 of the Act: the obligation to respond in a timely manner; an impartial (non-discriminatory) approach towards the persons concerned by the report; proportionality between the breach and the response measures; and transparency of procedures. Reports are considered in accordance with Article 37 of the Law, which guarantees the person subject to the report the right to be informed of the commencement of the procedure, to review the investigation materials, to provide explanations, and to be present during the proceedings.
The editorial team will coordinate its actions with the complainant, the author(s) and the editors-in-chief or members of the editorial board to investigate, rectify or resolve any issues or complaints.
Complaints, comments or requests for updates regarding the scientific validity, ethical or legal aspects of an article, or the peer-review process, will be investigated further where appropriate. All complaints, comments or requests for updates concerning published articles are investigated by the editorial team with the support of the editorial board and subject to final approval by the editor-in-chief. For ethical reasons, final decisions are taken by the editorial board to ensure compliance with the fundamental principles of publication ethics formulated by the Committee on Publication Ethics. Where necessary, consultations will be held with other individuals and institutions, including university management or experts in the field. A lawyer may be involved in the consideration of a complaint if it has legal implications.
Personal comments or criticism are not accepted. All complaints are investigated, including anonymous complaints. Complainants may request that the editorial board consider their complaint confidentially, and the editorial board, any editors-in-chief or other members of the editorial board will endeavour to do so, as far as is appropriate and in accordance with our internal procedures.
Decisions regarding corrections, comments and replies, the raising of objections or retractions resulting from an investigation are taken by the editorial board and communicated to the authors.
If a complaint is not considered justified, its further consideration will only continue if additional information is submitted to substantiate the comments/allegations.
Complainants may not receive updates on the status of the investigation until a final decision has been made; however, complainants will be notified if an update is published. The editorial board and its members are under no obligation to provide additional information. Communication will be terminated if it is not deemed honest or legitimate. Readers with complaints or comments should bear in mind that an investigation takes time, which, according to the journal’s internal regulations, should not exceed three months.
The journal’s editorial team works closely with authors and editors to promote adherence to the core principles of publication ethics formulated by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We encourage the use of COPE resources available on the website. All manuscripts must comply with standards of ethical conduct. When we become aware of ethical issues, we are committed to conducting an investigation and taking the necessary action.
The publisher and editors are always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, responses and apologies where necessary.

Procedure for retracting articles
Violations of legal restrictions imposed by the publisher, copyright holder or author(s), breaches of professional codes of ethics and scientific misconduct, such as multiple submissions, duplication or overlap of publications, false claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data and data fabrication, undisclosed use of tools based on large language models and generative artificial intelligence, honest errors reported by the authors (e.g., errors due to sample mixing or the use of scientific instruments or equipment that subsequently proved to be faulty), unethical research, or any serious violations require the retraction of the article. Occasionally, retraction may be used to correct errors in submission or publication.
For any retracted article, the reason for retraction and the person initiating the retraction will be clearly stated in the retraction notice. Standards for article retraction have been developed by a number of library and scientific organisations, and this practice has been adopted for article retraction by the journal «Contemporary Problems of Metallurgy»:
       – the online version of the retraction notice includes a link to the original article;
       – the online version of the original article includes a link to the retraction notice, which clearly states that the article has been retracted;
       – the original article remains unchanged, except for a watermark on the PDF file indicating on every page that the article has been «retracted».