Introduction. The work analyses chenges in the attitude to Open Access of the Russian scholarly community in 2018–2020.

Materials and methods. This study employs online survey methodology with quantitative analysis of results. Materials used are raw data of the survey among 828 respondents in 187 organizations conducted in July 2020 and resuts of the previus survey in 2018.

Results. Comparison of two surveys indicates notable growth of awareness, positive attitude and readiness for self-archiving in institutional repositories. Since 2018, the relative share of Russian authors published in OA has grown and reached 89 %. Four different professional groups show similar results for different models of OA publishing. The share of Russian institutions with repositories increased from 46 to 55 %, however still falls behind the values reported for European countries. Three quarters of respondents support mandatory OA publishing of research with state funding. 81 % consider that state policy of Open Access to scholarly publications has to be developed in Russia.

Discussion and conclusions. Results obtained in this work confirm strong support of the OA initiative by all proffecional groups of Russian academic community together with successfull experience of Russian researchers in OA publishing either in Gold OA or Green OA. In 2020, level of OA awareness of Russian researchers and research leaders exceeds the 2017 and 2019 indicators of European and American universities. In general, results in Russia fit recent results of national and international surveys.

Introduction. In the first part of the article, an attempt was made to trace some of the evolution of the concept of a “document”, which is now understood as any material object that can be used to obtain the information necessary for a person. In the second part, assuming that such an interpretation of the concept of a “document” is fruitful for possible reconsideration of viewpoints on the objects of bibliometrics, scientometrics and informetrics, a number of definitions of the objects of these three “metrices” have been examined with a speculative “inlining” the new meaning of the term “document” to the definitions of objects.

Materials and methods. Comparative analysis of the viewpoints of the objects of bibliometrics, scientometrics and informetrics that were expressed in some examples of definitions of these scientific fields; speculative “inlining” the new meaning of the term “document” in them; consideration the meanings of the objects of “metrices” altered as a result of the mentioned “inlining”.

Results. It is shown how noticeably the understanding of the objects of bibliometrics, scientometrics and informetrics can be revised as the result of the use of the updated “broad” interpretation of the concept of a “document” and how much the interpretations of the objects of bibliometrics, scientometrics and informetrics can be even closer in their meanings than previously was recognized.

Discussion and conclusion. Such a comparative analysis of the objects of the “metrices” might be helpful for identifying both similarities and differences among bibliometrics, scientometrics and informetrics. This is important, since the awareness of them is an obvious starting point for the mutual enrichment of “metrices” with knowledge and concepts. A more complete and detailed analysis of representations of the objects of the “metrices” in comparison with the updated “broad” interpretation of the concept of the “document”, as well as a comparison of the methodological components of “metrices” is the subject of further research.

This article considers the current state and evolution of the Russian publication flow in the field of Computer Science in the Web of Science (WOS) database. In this article, we use the term "Informatics" for "Computer Science". The study analyzes the Russian flow to determine its position in the world Computer Science publication flow and its compliance to the National project "Science" requirements.

We analyzed the Russian publication flow in 2010–2019 and compared it with other countries. The structure of the flow by the document type and its temporal dynamics was studied as well as the impact on citation metrics. Compliance of the flow characteristics to the requirements of the Ministry of Higher Education and Science of the Russian Federation (Ministry) requirements was analyzed.

The analysis indicates an increase in the number of Russian computer science publications within 2010-2019,
which outstrips the increase in the total number of world publications in Computer Science. This allowed Russia to move from 34 to 15 positions in the world rating in the studied research area. However, this position is not sufficient to achieve the goal of the "Science" National Project, namely, at least, the fifth position in the world rating.

According to the methodic requirements of the Ministry, four types of documents were studied: Journals Articles, Conferences Proceeding Papers, Book Chapters, and Reviews. All journals have been classified into the WOS journal quartiles. Our analysis shows that the percentage of publications in the journals of higher quartiles (first and second) increases constantly and made 42 % in 2019.

An increase in the number of the Conference Proceeding Papers was the highest among the studied document types.

The number of citations of the published documents was studied for each document type. It was shown that
the citing of the Journal Articles is by the order of magnitude higher than that of the Conference Proceeding Papers. This result indicates the very low interest of the Scientific Society to the Conference Proceeding  Papers as compared with the Journal Articles. We conclude that an increase in the number and relative share of the Conference Proceeding Papers together with their low citation results in the low numbers of the overall citation of the Russian publication flow in comparison with other countries neighboring Russia in the world rating.

The "Quality Coefficient" was calculated according to the Ministry’s methodic requirements. It was shown that the contribution of Conference Proceedings Papers to this coefficient is much lower than Journals Articles despite the number of the Conference Proceeding Papers is significantly higher.

As a result, the flow of Russian publications in the field of Informatics demonstrates significant, though insufficient, growth within the analyzed period. Special attention should be paid to the document type structure of the flow.

The paper analyzes various viewpoints on applicability of preprints used to exchange data on the following: how a non-peer-reviewed paper affects the way preprints are perceived in various sciences, how the academic community tackles the issue of evaluating preprints, how publishers treat preprints, how external factors affect the development of preprints, and who is responsible for the quality of preprints. The timeline has been identified for the development of preprints between 1940s and 2020. The development of preprints has been analyzed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data has been provided on current platforms and tools that can be used to work with preprints and to evaluate them.