Aim and Scope

The main goal of the journal "PRONEFT. PROFESSIONALLY ABOUT OIL" is the development of an innovative culture.

 the possibility of generalizing and disseminating the accumulated experience among the We want to expand the possibility of generalizing and disseminating the accumulated experience among the Russian and international scientific and industrial community of specialists professionally involved in general geology, geophysics, oil exploration, oil and gas geology, and the development of mineral deposits.

Our tasks

Ensuring the exchange of accumulated scientific, technical and social production experience among Russian and international oil and gas companies, partner universities, industry and international research centers.

Attraction and use of modern efficient technologies at the enterprises of the Russian oil and gas industry.

Section Policies

GEOLOGY AND EXPLORATION

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF OIL FIELDS

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

WELL DRILLING

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

DESIGN OF OIL FIELDS DEVELOPMENT

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

ECONOMICS AND LAW

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

OILFIELD EQUIPMENT

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

COMPANY NEWS

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

NEW TECHNOLOGIES

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Publication Frequency

4 times per year

Open Access Policy

This is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.

Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.

For more information please read BOAI statement.

Archiving

• Russian State Library (RSL)
• National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)

Peer-Review

An unilateral anonymous ("blind") peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of "PRONEFT. PROFESSIONALLY ABOUT OIL". This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.

1. Members of the editorial board and leading Russian and international experts in corresponding areas of sciences, invited as independent readers, perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief or science editor choose readers for peer review. We aim to limit the review process to 1-3 month, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. We politely request that the editor to 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.
5. If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
6. 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.
7. Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
8. 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.
9. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 5 years.

Publishing Ethics

1. Introduction

1.1. The publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal serves many purposes outside of simple communication. For this and other reasons, it is important to set standards for the expected ethical behavior by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and Scientific Society for the “PRONEFT. Professionally about oil” journal

1.2. Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.

1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. We recognize our responsibilities in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1. Publication decision – The Scientific editor “PRONEFT. Professionally about oil” journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society Science and Technology Center. 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 editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may consult with other editors or reviewers or with the Scientific and Technical Center that owns the journal when making this decision.

2.2. Honest – 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.

2.3. Confidentiality –The office employees, members of the editorial board and reviewers undertake not to disclose any information received in the course of interaction with authors, which is or may be marked as confidential.

2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript cannot 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 from reviewing manuscripts (i.e: should ask the Co-Editor, Assistant Editor, or cooperate with other members of the Editorial Board to review and consider) in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with by authors, companies, and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.

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  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. 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. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

3.2. Trust – 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 “PRONEFT. Professionally about oil” journal and excuse himself from the review process.

3.3. Confidentiality – 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. Reviewers 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

“PRONEFT. Professionally about oil” journal by default believes that authors:

- are familiar with the current laws of the Russian Federation on copyright and do not violate them;

- in no way infringe on any rights of any third parties;

- respect the opinion of editors and reviewers;

- accept the decisions made by the editorial office;

- are aware of the possible consequences and do not commit any of the following violations:

• use of somebody else’s intellectual property without the required permission (plagiarism);
• fabrication of data;
• submitting false research results.

The magazine believes that the author is innocent of the violations until proven guilty.

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 www.icmje.org.

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. Hazards

4.7.1. If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. 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.

4.8.2. 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.

4.9.  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 of “PRONEFT. Professionally about oil” journal and cooperate with Publisher 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. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of in “PRONEFT. Professionally about oil” journal 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.

5.2. The publisher must follow the principles and procedures that facilitate the fulfillment of ethical obligations by the Editors, Reviewers and Authors of «PRONEFT. Professionally about oil» journal in accordance with these requirements. The publisher must be confident that potential revenue from advertising or reprints does not influence the Editors' decisions.

5.3. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.

5.4. The section is prepared according to the files from Committee on Publication Ethics COPE - https://publicationethics.org/

Founder

• Gazprom Neft Science and Technology Center

Author fees

Publication in “PROneft. Professionally about Oil" is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.

The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

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

“PROneft. Professionally about Oil" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.

Preprint and postprint Policy

Prior to acceptance and publication in “PROneft. Professionally about Oil", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in “PROneft. Professionally about Oil" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Glossary (by SHERPA)

Revenue Sources

The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization, at the expense of the publisher, publication of advertising materials, publication of reprints, article processment charges.