Requirements

Paper Presentation Requirements and Guidelines

At lease one author of each paper has to present the paper in the thematic or plenary sessions, according to the technical program. Exceptions are permitted only for papers published in BulTrans Proceedings (ISSN 1313-955X), after approval of the Organizing committee.

It is recommended that articles be presented in English. Presenting in Bulgarian and Russian is also permitted.

The presentation materials projected during the sessions must be in English.

The duration of plenary lectures is up to 30 min.

The duration of scientific papers and announcements is up 15 min.

Manuscript Requirements

The manuscript must be strictly formed according to this template:

TEMPLATE

The manuscript has to be in either English or Bulgarian. English is the recommended language due to better indexing in international scientific databases. An abstract in English has to be provided at the end of the paper if the manuscript is in Bulgarian.

Articles should not exceed 6 pages. Larger articles are allowed after permission from the Organizing Committee.

Only papers corresponding to the above instructions will be published.

Maximum Permitted Papers

Each perticipant can be co-author of up to 2 papers.

Report verification and approval

Verification and approval of the reports is carried out in four stages involving different procedures and criteria. All steps in this process are implemented through the web-based conference management system – process.bultrans.org

Stage I - Title and abstract approval

  • Does the report topic correspond to the conference topics?
  • Is the article topic chosen correctly?
  • Title and abstract – content, grammar, length, terminology.

If the title and abstract application does not meet these criteria, the Editor-in-Chief may reject it or return it with remarks for corrections.

Stage II – Full text approval by the Editor-in-Chief

  • Does the full text match the title and abstract?
  • Does the layout match the conference template?
  • Does the report contain the following mandatory elements: abstract, introduction, argument, conclusion, references, title and abstract in English (if the full text is in Bulgarian)?
    • Is the abstract sufficiently informative?
    • Does the report contain adequate sources/references, state-of-the-problem analysis, purpose and tasks of the study?
    • Does the report contain experimental confirmation of the corresponding theoretical/numerical methods/models, results and discussion?
    • Does the conclusion summarize the results, the advantages of the method used, the application areas?
    • Does the reference list contain adequate literary sources - such as quantity, topicality and representativeness?
  • Do the figures, charts, and tables meet the required quality? Are they numbered correctly?

If the report meets the criteria, the Editor-in-Chief directs it for review.

  • Very minor changes, such as corrections to language or layout, can be made by the editorial board. In such case, the edited version will be returned to the author for approval.
  • If the flaws are more serious, the Editor-in-Chief returns the report with remarks for revision;
  • If the flaws are too serious, the Editor-in-Chief may refuse to publish the report, with the consent of the Editorial Board.

At the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief, reports that have been refused publication in MATEC may be submitted for publication in the traditional BulTrans proceedings.

Stage III – Review process

Each report goes through a review process. At least one review is being created by a specialist in the respective field, through a unified template. The identity of the authors is not revealed to the reviewer. The authors are given access to the full text of the reviews, the identity of the reviewer not being revealed to them. For the applications for publication in MATEC, the reviewers meet the following criteria:

  • They have academic ranks;
  • They have publications with an impact factor or impact rank;
  • Whenever possible, reviewers not within the same organization as the authors of the report are selected.

Each review concludes with a motivated proposal from among the following options:

  • The report is to be published as it is - MATEC Publication (indexing in Scopus);
  • The report is to be published after corrections - MATEC Publication (indexing in Scopus);
  • The report is to be published as it is - in the traditional BulTrans Proceedings, issue of TU-Sofia;
  • The report is to be published after corrections - in the traditional BulTrans Proceedings, issue of TU-Sofia;
  • The report should not be published.

If the reviewer has comments on the article and/or proposes corrections, the Editor-in-Chief returns the report for revision, giving the deadline and applying the review without disclosing his identity of the reviewer. Corrected reports are approved by the Editor-in-Chief when the remarks are minor or are sent back to the reviewer – in case of serious remarks.

Upon completion of the review process, reports and reviews are submitted to the editorial board.

Stage IV – Editorial Board

The Editorial Board makes the final decision whether to publish or reject a report, as well as the place of its publication. Decisions of the board are based on the following criteria:

  • The recommendations and remarks in reviews;
  • The opinion of each Editorial Board member, formed upon analysis of the report, the reviews and the opinion of the Editor-in-Chief;
  • Editorial Board discussions.

The Editorial Board may require additional review of any paper.

If the decision is to publish the report in a different place from the one stated, the authors reserve their rights to refuse, in which case the report does not participate in the conference and can be published elsewhere.