Stress testing of the scientific journal
https://doi.org/10.24069/2542-0267-2021-1-18-27
Abstract
An analysis of the risks confronted by the editorial staff of the scientific Journal of Almaz – Antey Air and Space Defence Corporation was made. It is shown that one of the risks brought the journal into a state of stress test and significant increase in input parameters, which affected the work of the editorial board. The article provides data on reducing the negative impact of a stress test and presents the results of simulation modeling of the impact of a stress test on the editorial board of a scientific journal. These input parameters were the flow of articles to the journal, which exceeded the average values of the process reviewing for a short period of time by ten times. To eliminate the impact of stress testing on the work of the editorial board of the scientific journal, measures were taken to neutralize it in the form of an increase in the number of reviewers and early initiation of articles. In addition to the results on reducing the impact of stress testing, a simulation of an impossible flow of articles that exceeds the average by a hundred times was performed, and the time indicators of its processing are given. The model is based on the Monte Carlo method under the assumption that each reviewer has an average processing time of the article received by him, as well as the law of distribution of this time. The results of the correlation analysis of the simulation results and real data on the processing of the received articles are presented, which allow us to talk about the relationship between real and simulated processes.
About the Author
D. Yu. Bolshakov
Almaz – Antey Air and Space Defence Corporation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Denis Yu. Bolshakov, Cand. Sci. (Eng.), Head of the Department of Scientific and Technical Issues and Special Projects of the Office of the Director General; Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of “Almaz – Antey” Air and Space Defence Corporation
Moscow
References
1. Siddique A., Hasan I. Stress Testing: Approaches, Methods and Applications. London: Incisive Media; 2013. 457 p.
2. Криспин Л., Грегори Д. Гибкое тестирование: практическое руководство для тестировщиков ПО и гибких команд. М.: Вильямс; 2010. 464 с.
3. Дюжева Е. Н., Васильева Е. Ю., Шпектор А. В. Динамика дисперсии q-t в процессе стресс-теста как показатель стенотического поражения коронарных артерий. Креативная кардиология. 2010;(2):80–87.
4. Филатов А. А., Калинин Н. А., Пономарев В. М., Дубинский В. Г. Исследование гидродинамики испытаний трубопроводов повышенным давлением (методом стресс-теста). Газовая промышленность. 2011;(9):51–55.
5. Кузнецов П. Л., Муравьев В. В. Контроль качества электролитических танталовых конденсаторов с использованием стресс-теста. Приборы и методы измерений. 2015;(1):76–80.
6. Kenton W. Stress Testing. Investopedia. May 2020. Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stresstesting.asp
7. Большаков Д. Ю. Аналитика редакционно-издательских процессов научного журнала. Научный редактор и издатель. 2020;5(2):102–112. DOI: 10.24069/2542-0267-2020-2-102-112
8. Большаков Д. Ю. Опыт привлечения молодых ученых в качестве рецензентов в научно-технический журнал. Научный редактор и издатель. 2020;5(1):16–21. DOI: 10.24069/2542-0267-2020-1-16-21
9. Larson E. W., Gray C. F. Project Management: The Managerial Process (McGraw-Hill Series Operations and Decision Sciences). 7th ed. McGraw-Hill Education; 2017. 688 p.
10. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) 6th ed. Project Management Institute; 2017. 756 p. Available at: https://book.akij.net/eBooks/2018/March/5abcc35b666f7/a%20guide%20to%20the%20project%20management%20body%20of%20knowledge%206e.pdf
11. Полковников А., Дубовик М. Управление проектами. Полный курс МВА. М.: Олимп-Бизнес; 2017. 552 с.
12. Гмурман В. Е. Теория вероятностей и математическая статистика. 9-е изд. М.: Высшая школа; 2003. 479 c. Режим доступа: http://lib.maupfib.kg/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Teoria_veroatnosty_mat_stat.pdf
13. Erlang A. K. Sandsynlighedsregning og Telefonsamtaler. Nyt Tidsskrift for Matematik. 1909;20(B):33–39. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24528622
14. Scandizzo S. Stress Testing Models. In: The Validation of Risk Models. Applied Quantitative Finance series. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2016. DOI: 10.1057/9781137436962_14
15. Пугачев В. С. Теория вероятностей и математическая статистика. 2-е изд., испр. и доп. М.: Физматлит; 2002. 496 с.
16. Большаков Д. Ю. Еще раз о рецензировании. Вестник Концерна ВКО «Алмаз – Антей». 2019;3(30):4–6. Режим доступа: http://journal.almaz-antey.ru/jour/article/viewFile/134/94
17. Вентцель Е. С. Исследование операций: задачи, принципы, методология. 2-е изд. М.: Наука; 1988. 208 с. Режим доступа: https://systems-analysis.ru/assets/operation-research_venttsel.pdf
Review
For citations:
Bolshakov D.Yu. Stress testing of the scientific journal. Science Editor and Publisher. 2021;6(1):18-27. https://doi.org/10.24069/2542-0267-2021-1-18-27
Views: 664
Email this article 
