CHRONICLE How to Publish a Good Article and to Reject a Bad One. Notes of a Reviewer

The rank of a scientist depends not only on the level of his/her own achievements, but also on an ability to understand the achievements of others. Therefore, reviewing is pivotal in scientific activity. It is not a simple matter to write a good article unless the author reads his article through the referee’s eyes. While young scientists may learn how to write an article from their supervisors and reading the articles of others (which are not always worthy of imitation), often they only have a vague idea on reviewing. Unfortunately, reviewing is not taught in Russian universities and our post-graduates in general look at lectures askew (on the contrary, attending a course of lectures on speciality is compulsory in foreign universities). I have not come across any textbook on reviewing. Therefore, I was urged by an idea to share my experience with others: lately, I had to read and write many reviews for several leading scientific journals and international conferences. It turned out that hints to a referee can hardly be separated from the hints to an author, and this explains the title of my article. Though the data and examples given below pertain to fields of my interest—automaton and control—my observations may apply equally to other areas. 1. WHY TO REVIEW? A post-graduate generally faces the reviewing problem only when he faces the problem of writin