The journal Novi Sad Journal of Mathematics (NSJOM) - Formerly Review of Research, Faculty of Science, Mathematics Series (Zb. Rad. Prirod.-Mat. Fak. Ser. Mat) from Volume 1, 1971, to Volume 15, 1995 - publishes original research and research-expository papers covering all areas of pure and applied mathematics. Our aim is to publish papers of interest and understandable to a wide mathematical audience rather than to a narrow class of specialists, thus bringing together different branches of mathematics. Clarity of exposition, accuracy of details and the relevance and interest of the subject matter will be the decisive factors in our acceptance of an article for publication.
Novi Sad Journal of Mathematics is an Open Access journal.
Contributions to journal shall be submitted in English, with summaries also in English.
The Journal is issued twice a year.
The journal is archived at the National Library of Serbia and Matica Srpska Library.
The journal is indexed in Mathematical Reviews, Zentralblatt für Mathematik, Referativnyi Zhurnal and Current Mathematical Publications, worldwide distributed to numerous university libraries.
Submitted papers are subject to a quick overview by the Editor-in-Chief before entering into a more detailed peer review process. The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject any manuscript that does not conform to the journal's scope or that is not prepared under requested technical standards, and the right to decide not to publish submitted manuscripts in case that they do not meet relevant standards concerning the content and formal aspects.
For each paper, if not apriori rejected, the Editor-in-Chief assignes an Editor among the members of the Editorial Board. The Editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles assigned to him will be published in Novi Sad Journal of Mathematics. The Editor is guided by the Editorial Policy and constrained by legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
The Editor must hold no conflict of interest with regard to the articles they consider for publication. If the Editor feels that there is a conflict of interest in relation to their handling of a submission, the selection of reviewers and all decisions on the paper shall be made by the Editor-in-Chief.
The Editor shall evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content free from any racial, gender, sexual, religious, ethnic, or political bias.
The Editor and the Editorial Staff must not use unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts without the express written consent of the authors. The information and ideas presented in submitted manuscripts shall be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain.
Editors and the Editorial Staff shall take all reasonable measures to ensure that the reviewers remain anonymous to the authors before, during and after the evaluation process.
The Editorial Staff will inform the authors whether the manuscript is accepted for publication within a month from the date of receiving referees' reviews.
Authors warrant that their manuscript is their original work, that it has not been published before and it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Parallel submission of the same paper to another journal constitutes a misconduct and eliminates the manuscript from consideration by Novi Sad Journal of Mathematics. In case a submitted manuscript is a result of a research project, detailed information about the project shall be provided at the Acknowledgements section, or at the footnote related to the title of the article. A paper that has already been published in another journal cannot be reprinted in Novi Sad Journal of Mathematics. It is the responsibility of each author to ensure that papers submitted to Novi Sad Journal of Mathematics are written with ethical standards in mind. Authors affirm that the article contains no unfounded or unlawful statements and does not violate the rights of third parties. The Publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.
A submitted manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit reviewers and, subsequently, readers to verify the claims presented in it. The deliberate presentation of false claims is a violation of ethical standards. Book reviews and technical papers should be accurate and they should present an objective perspective.
Authors are exclusively responsible for the contents of their submissions and must make sure that they have permission from all involved parties to make the data public.
Authors must make sure that only contributors who have significantly contributed to the submission are listed as authors and, conversely, that all contributors who have significantly contributed to the submission are listed as authors. If persons other than authors were involved in important aspects of the research project and the preparation of the manuscript, their contribution should be acknowledged in a footnote or the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are required to properly cite sources that have influenced their research and their manuscript. Information received in a private conversation or correspondence with third parties, in reviewing project applications, manuscripts and similar materials, must not be used without the express written consent of the information source.
Plagiarism, where someone assumes another's ideas, words, or other creative expression as one's own, is a clear violation of scientific ethics. Plagiarism may also involve a violation of copyright law, punishable by legal action.
Plagiarism includes the following:
Any paper which shows obvious signs of plagiarism will be automatically rejected. The authors will not have an opportunity to publish papers in NSJOM and all other journals with whom we have cooperation will be informed.
In case plagiarism is discovered in a paper that has already been published by the journal, it will be retracted in accordance with the procedure described below under Retraction policy, and authors will not have an opportunity to publish papers in NSJOM and all other journals with whom we have cooperation will be informed.
Authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might have influenced the presented results or their interpretation.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify a journal Editor or the Editorial Staff and cooperate with the Editor-in-Chief or the assigned Editor to retract or correct the paper.
By submitting a manuscript the authors agree to abide by the NSJOM’s Editorial Policies.
Reviewers are required to provide written, competent and unbiased feedback in a timely manner on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the manuscript.
The reviewers assess manuscript for the compliance with the profile of the journal, the relevance of the investigated topic and applied methods, the originality and scientific relevance of information presented in the manuscript, the presentation style and scholarly apparatus.
Reviewers should alert the Editor to any well-founded suspicions or the knowledge of possible violations of ethical standards by the authors. Reviewers should recognize relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors and alert the Editor to substantial similarities between a reviewed manuscript and any manuscript published or under consideration for publication elsewhere, in the event they are aware of such. Reviewers should also alert the Editor to a parallel submission of the same paper to another journal, in the event they are aware of such.
Reviewers must not have conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the funding sources for the research. If such conflicts exist, the reviewers must report them to the Editor without delay.
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 without delay.
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not use unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts without the express written consent of the authors. The information and ideas presented in submitted manuscripts shall be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain.
The submitted manuscripts are subject to a peer review process. The purpose of peer review is to assist the Editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communication with the author it may also assist the author in improving the paper. The review process is single-blind (identity of the author is known to the referee, but the authors do not know the identity of the referee). Usually, one reviewer is assigned per paper. Reviewers have three months to prepare a review and they are not paid.
The choice of reviewers is at the Editors' discretion. The reviewers should be knowledgeable about the subject area of the manuscript; they must not be from the authors' own institution and they should not have recent joint publications with any of the authors.
All of the reviewers of a paper act independently and they are not aware of each other’s identities. If there is more than one reviewer assigned and their decisions are not all the same (accept/reject), the Editor may assign additional reviewers. During the review process the Editor may require from authors to provide additional information (including raw data) if it is necessary for the evaluation of the scholarly merit of the manuscript. These materials shall be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain.
The Editorial Team shall ensure reasonable quality control for the reviews. With respect to reviewers whose reviews are convincingly questioned by authors, special attention will be paid to ensure that the reviews are objective and high in academic standard. When there is any doubt with regard to the objectivity of the reviews or quality of the review, additional reviewers will be assigned.
Anyone may inform the Editors and/or Editorial Staff at any time of suspected unethical behaviour or any type of misconduct by giving the necessary information/evidence to start an investigation.
Minor misconduct will be dealt directly with those involved without involving any other parties, e.g. by:
Using the available evidences, the Editor, in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief and/or Editorial Board, and, when appropriate, further consultation with a group of experts, should make a decision regarding the course of action to be taken. The possible outcomes are as follows (these can be used separately or jointly):
When dealing with unethical behaviour, the Editorial Staff will rely on the guidelines and recommendations provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): http://publicationethics.org/resources/.
Legal limitations of the publisher, copyright holder or author(s), infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or any major misconduct require retraction of an article. Occasionally a retraction can be used to correct errors in submission or publication. The main reason for withdrawal or retraction is to correct the mistake while preserving the integrity of science; it is not to punish the author.
Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by a number of libraries and scholarly bodies, and this practice has been adopted for article retraction by NSJOM: in the electronic version of the retraction note, a link is made to the original article. In the electronic version of the original article, a link is made to the retraction note where it is clearly stated that the article has been retracted. The original article is retained unchanged, with a watermark on the PDF indicating on each page that it is “retracted.”