When submitting the review the reviewer is asked to fill in the following:
1. Reviewer conclusion: (one of multiply choice)
Evaluation of the paper’s content:
2. Does the paper include new scientific content or value of utility (specify to what extent)?
yes no please specify
3. Are the assumptions and methodology of work properly adopted?
yes no
4. Is the correct terminology used?
yes no
5. Are the SI units applied consistently?
yes no
6. Does the title of the paper correspond to its content?
yes no
7. Does the abstract capture the essence of the paper?
yes no
8. Does the abstract of the paper is well-written?
yes no
9. Is the illustrative material (tab., fig.) properly selected and not repetitive?
yes no
10. Is the choice of cited literature accurate and sufficient?
yes no
11. Information for Editors (not visible for authors)
Obligatory
12. Information for Authors:
Obligatory
13. Attachment (if needed)
