Katerina Denisova Septembe

[lopebix427]

We continue to analyze the successes of young scientists. In the review of the latest issue, two authors at once got into the "nominations" in two categories. On the one hand, this shows the scientific growth of individual researchers. The more meta-components are performed qualitatively, the higher the level of work as a whole. On the other hand, this is sad, because it turns out that the number of young scientists capable of writing successful introductions and conclusions is decreasing.

r 10, 2020 scientific articles article reviews
Review of the best articles of "Young Scientist" No. 35 (325)
I am pleased to present you with another review of articles with the highest quality metadata. It is pleasant to note that the recommendations given in previous times have not gone unnoticed. albania telemarketing data Authors listen attentively to them and noticeably improve the quality of their work.Review of the best articles of "Young Scientist" No. 10 (352) 236
The introductions again turned out to be the weak point of the entire review. Firstly, there are only two of them, and secondly, one of them only had two mandatory elements. We recommend that authors, when submitting articles for editorial consideration, check the completeness of the introductions.

The lack of good introductions was compensated by an additional high-quality set of keywords - in this category, as always, everything is impeccable.

We would like to highlight one work that was nominated in two categories at once – introduction and conclusion. Of course, the introduction could have been worked on more diligently, but the conclusion is very high-quality. The author also deserves praise for writing one of the best annotations in recent times.

The most thoughtful names
1. INCREASING THE STABILITY OF AN INTEGRATED MULTI-SERVICE TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK FOR SPECIAL PURPOSE

This title is not too long (easy to read, the main idea is easily perceived), but not too short (the object and subject of the study are clearly reflected). By mentioning the increase in the stability of the object, the author suggested his personal contribution. The results of the relevant activities probably constitute the scientific novelty of the study.