The  author  reviews  the  history  of  Russian  central   sci-tech  library  in 1918-1919. During this  period, the  library was called  The State  Scientific Technical and  Economic Library (SSTEL) and  was part  of the  Sci-tech  Department of the  Supreme  Council of National  Economy of the  Russian  Soviet Federative  Socialist  Republic.  Further,  in  1927-1958,  this  largest   library  organization  was called  The State  Scientific Library. It became  the  foundation to the  Russian  National  Public  Library for Science  and  Technology  and  State  Public  Scientific  & Technological  Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences Siberian Branch.

The author  analyzes  the pool of the government and departmental solutions that  laid the  basis for the  Library; he also describes  organization process, and reviews  personal  contributions of librarians  to  the  initial  library organization and collection  development.  He characterizes the  first  SSTEL leaders  and  librarians (M.L. Milshtein, Karl F. Gessel, Nikolay N. Orlov). In particular, he emphasizes the outstanding contribution by Nikolay P. Gorbunov  (former  assistant to  Vladimir Lenin, later an academic).

At the  initial  stages,  two  well-stocked public  libraries  were  merged  into SSTEL, namely  the  Society for Advancement of Experimental  Sciences  and Their Practical Applications named  by H.S. Ledentsov  (and its specialized  library building) and Moscow Technical Library of the Polytechnic Society.

The author  concludes  that  the  efforts  of librarians  and  scholars  in the  Supreme  Council of National  Economy made  it possible  to establish the  central  national  sci-tech  library and  get  it off the  ground  during  the  hardest  years  of the Civil War.

The authors  examine  the  key problems  inhibiting  scientometric studies and  scientific  communications. These  challenges call  for significant  efforts  and professional courage. Firstly, this is the need for open access to scientometric data and improvement of their  quality  and comprehensiveness, including  author  data, affiliations, citations  and meta  information.  The authors  emphasize the  necessity for large-scale introduction of technologies for identifying  objects  of science  information   (i.  e.  publications,  researchers,  organizations,  projects,  etc.),  which would enable  to decrease significantly the number of bibliographic  mistakes.

When projecting  scientometric studies, the  edge  of objects  and analysis  instruments have  to be defined  by the  goals  rather  than  by bibliometric  database limitations.  Indexing  of scientific  publications is among  the  key instruments. Its advancement is determined by emerging  and low-quality  classifications of bibliometric  databases, their  differences, and  changing  science  structure.  Finally, the propriety  of scientometric methods  and results  interpretation, in particular  that  of scientometric performance assessment, have to be controlled.    Meeting these challenges will enable  to provide  efficient  monitoring  of scientific  activity based on  operative  collection, processing  and  analysis  of scientific  information  flows rather  than  on annual  statistical surveys. This transfer  would improve monitoring significantly and expand  the spectrum  of solutions;  it would also enable  to reveal system changes  in research, to respond  to disparities  in development, and to make the solutions  in science management more efficient.

Science  today  is the  key factor  of social  development and  focus of the government policy. The  published   and  globally  acknowledged research   results reflect  the  advance  of the  national  science.  The author  assesses the  publication activity of Russian scientists within  the  context  of the  goals  of the  national  sci-tech policy. The newness  and originality of the study lies in revealing  and analyzing  of intrinsic  and  extrinsic  factors  of publication   activity.  The author  applied the  method   of  comparing  bibliometric   indicators  to  characterize the  works  by Russian scientists in Scopus database.  The goals  of the  study  are: 1) to analyze publication  activity structure and dynamics; 2) to define  publication  impact;  and 3) to evaluate competitive strength and  potential of publication activity of Russian scientists as compared  to foreign researchers. Based on the bibliometric  indicators, the  author  reveals  heterodromous trends  in Russian science. Traditionally, Russian  science  maintains   its  positions  in the  share  of publications in leading journals,  with  the   fast  developing   life  sciences   increasing   the   total   number of publications; while the multidisciplinary  studies  make the most promising  vector. The author concludes  that despite  increasing  number of publications and their  impact,  their   contribution  to  the   global   science   continues  to  be  a  relevant problem.

The authors  introduce  the  findings  of their  research  on  updating  and improving  the  existing  master  version  of the  State  Rubricator  of Sci-tech  Information  (GRNTI) version 2021 and building  the  General Classification  Schedule  of the  master  GRNTI 2022 version. They define  the  main functions  of GRNTI as the standard classification  of the State System of Sci-tech Information. The functional efficiency  depends on the  compliance  of the  Rubricator’s subject  and  structural organization to the current  status  and trends  of scientific knowledge  and technologies.  The main  stages  of the  accomplished studies  are  described:  comparative intellectual analysis of subject  scope and hierarchy of GRNTI classes  and thematic description  of sections  within  the  Plan  of Fundamental and  Thematic  Scientific Research  for 2021–2030; submitting proposals  for GRNTI by researchers of relevant research  institutes and STI agencies;  analyzing and content editing  of GRNTI proposals, eliminating concept  duplication, and updating  links and references.  The authors  include  the  statistics of changes  distribution in  GRNTI  2021 by types: changed  subject  headings, new headings  introduction, and elimination of the  subject headings.  Statistical  indicators  are analyzed  to characterize GRNTI subject  and structural organization, as well as its thematic classes (2nd  and 3rd  level headings).

The author  reviews  the  results  of the  survey of the  researchers of the Siberian  Branch of the  Russian Academy  of Sciences  (SB RAS), responses to The State  of Open Data survey of researchers in 192  countries  (2016–2022), and interviews  of the  librarians  of SB RAS scientific  organizations on their  attitude to open science  and its information  support.  The study was accomplished within the research  project  of SB RAS State  Public Scientific and Technological  Library “Development of the  functional  model  of scientific  library in the  open  science  information  ecosystem”. The author  demonstrates that  the  researchers have  been  increasingly  publishing  their  results  in the  open  science  (OS) journals, though  still are  unaware  of  OS types, doubt  OS publications quality, and  beware  data  exchange.  The scientists are  positive  about  open  science  and  an  open  data  (OD) system, OD and open-source software, open  cooperation between researchers, as well as open  peer  reviewing. The study also proves that  the  librarians  have been providing traditional services, not very eager  about  open science support  services, doubt  their necessity  and relevance.  The author  argues  that  the librarians  have to reconsider  their  attitude toward  open  science  support, to explore  new resources, to expand  their  competences, and to build the  system  of integrated information support  of scientific research, which makes the libraries active actors in advancing open science practices.

The article  is based  on  the  methodology of selecting publications for reviewing  proposed  earlier  (see  Scientific  and  Technical  Journal.  2022.  No. 11. Р. 56–82). This methodology enables  to  systematize the  process  of publication selection with the results  cited in the protocol. The “embedded librarianship” concept definition  is based on the activity component. Three subject vectors are high-lighted  in visualization  of the  study  subject  scope,  namely, librarians  in medical environment, librarians  in education, and librarians  involved in scientific research. The conventional embedded librarian’s profile is formulated, with the professional functionality  described  and environment characterized. The specialist’s basic competences are information  literacy and client orientation. Being complemented with  unique  competences,  the  basic  skills  enable   the  embedded  librarians   to transfer  from the  status  of resource-users agent  to  that  of research  group  full-fledged  participant.  The author  suggests her adapted translations of the  concept names.

“Embedded  librarianship”  has  substantial  potential  within  the  framework of scientific  research  information  support  in the  form of reviews,  which explains why the reviews are seen  as an informative  source, in particular  for the librarians developing  library programs  with “embedded” information  services.  The concept may be used for organizing services in research  and academic libraries.

The author  analyzes  the content of the monograph by Yury N. Stolyarov, prominent Russian  library  scientist  and  encyclopedist. The  monograph “Library collection  studies”  reveals  the  ontological status  of library collection  and covers the  history  and  the  key subject  scope  and  practical  goals  of library  collection studies  as an individual  library discipline.  In particular,  the  “document” scientific and  practical  category  is  examined   as  a  fundamental to  the  library  document studies  and general  documentology. The theory  of library collection  studies  is in the  focus of the  monograph author  who proceeds  from the  library collection  key role  and  the  assumption that  any problem  in the  library studies  is related  to library collections.  He applies  special  terminology  to examine  the  place  of library collection  within the “Library” system, library collection  attributes and characteristics, general  provisions, principles and laws of the library collection  theory, as well as information  security  and library collection  system  functions.  The definition  of the  “library collection” concept  is offered. Library scientists, bibliographers, book scientists, librarians  of all types  of libraries, faculty members  in the  system  of library and information  education, students, post-graduates, and the Russian bibliophilic community will make the readership of the monograph.  It may contribute to the  theoretical, methodological, and professional core knowledge  in every library discipline.