COSMIC RESEARCH

宇宙研究发表涵盖空间科学和技术所有主题的科学论文，包括：弹道学、地球人造卫星和自动行星际站的飞行动力学；跨大气层下降问题；航天器和科学研究仪器的设计和结构；载人航天器的生命支持系统和辐射安全；从空间探索地球；探索近空间；探索太阳、行星、次行星和行星际介质；探索恒星、星云、星际介质、星系、和来自航天器的类星体；以及与空间探索有关的各种天体物理学问题。还提供了关于该期刊主要主题的科学事件和其他通告的编年史。同行审查宇宙研究是一个同行评审的期刊。根据纸张的不同，我们使用单/双盲。我们的评审团队包括35名内部和外部评审人员（70%）。从提交到2017年作出第一项决定的平均时间为14天，从作出第一项决定到接受决定的平均时间为75天。2017年提交手稿的拒绝率为25%。接受文章出版的最终决定，由编委或者总编作出。因利益冲突而感到不合格或无法审阅稿件的被邀评审人，应及时通知编辑并拒绝邀请。审评员应以合理合理的方式清晰地表述他们的陈述，以便作者可以利用审评员的论据来改进手稿。必须避免对作者的个人批评。审查人员应在审查中(1)说明作者未引用的任何相关出版作品，(2以前出版物中已报告但未给予适当参考或引用的任何内容，（3）与其本人所知的其他手稿（已出版或未出版）有任何实质性的相似或重叠。

Cosmic Research publishes scientific papers covering all subjects of space science and technology, including the following: ballistics, flight dynamics of the Earth’s artificial satellites and automatic interplanetary stations; problems of transatmospheric descent; design and structure of spacecraft and scientific research instrumentation; life support systems and radiation safety of manned spacecrafts; exploration of the Earth from Space; exploration of near space; exploration of the Sun, planets, secondary planets, and interplanetary medium; exploration of stars, nebulae, interstellar medium, galaxies, and quasars from spacecraft; and various astrophysical problems related to space exploration. A chronicle of scientific events and other notices concerning the main topics of the journal are also presented.PEER REVIEWCosmic Research is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single/double blind depending on the paper level. Our team of reviewers includes 35 reviewers, both internal and external (70%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 14 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 75 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 25%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board or the Editor-in-Chief.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, (iii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.