Russian Microelectronics (Mikroelektronika) covers the physical, technological, and some VLSI and ULSI circuit-technical aspects of microelectronics and nanoelectronics; it informs the reader of new trends in submicron optical, x-ray, electron, and ion-beam lithography technology, dry processing techniques, etching, doping, and deposition and planarization technology. Significant space is devoted to problems arising in the application of proton, electron, and ion beams, plasma, etc. Consideration is given to new equipment, including cluster tools and control in situ and submicron CMOS, bipolar, and BICMOS technologies. The journal presents papers addressing problems of molecular beam epitaxy and related processes, heterojunction devices and integrated circuits, the technology and devices of nanoelectronics, and the fabrication of nanometer scale devices, including new device structures, quantum-effect devices, and superconducting devices. The reader will find papers containing news of the diagnostics of surfaces and microelectronic structures, the modeling of technological processes and devices in micro- and nanoelectronics, includeng nanotransistors, and solid state realizations of qubits.
The journal is intended for specialists at research institutes, universities, and other educational establishments; for graduate students; and, to a certain extent, for those working at industrial laboratories.
Russian Microelectronics is a peer reviewed journal. We use a double blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes over 27 reviewers, both internal and external (37%), from 5 countries (Russia, Belarus, China, Belgium, Germany). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 20 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 60 days. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.
Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review (i) any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors, (ii) anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
S. A. Pivovarenok (July 2018)
To view the rest of this content please follow the download PDF link above.