Peer Review

Review Guidelines

Peer Review Process & Instructions

Rationale for Manuscript Review

In order to provide more interesting and useful articles to the scientific community in the long run, we have strengthened the standards of judgment of our proceedings editors. In pursuit of this goal, we ensure that our proceedings editors are committed to a rigorous peer review process. Conference organizers and editors have the right to select article reviewers, but all reviewers must have appropriate expertise in their fields. The reviewers selected for our proceedings articles come from trusted institutions, and the review process complies with high ethical standards. By implementing this robust peer review process, the proceedings articles we publish will become important reference materials, recognize editors' contributions, and increase the value of your article in abstracting and indexing services.

Manuscript Review Instructions

Proceedings provide greater opportunities than journals in terms of the number of articles that can be published, allowing us to create truly comprehensive proceedings volumes. However, it is always important to remember that we must maintain quality despite the wider scope of proceedings articles. Therefore, we urge all editors and peers to assess each manuscript according to the following minimum criteria rigorously.

1 Quality Criteria

a) Background: Contains useful or interesting background information.
b) Clarity: Provides an excellent description or explanation of a complex topic.
c) Perspective: Offers an enjoyable and informative overview or theoretical viewpoint.
d) Excellence: Demonstrates thoroughness, accuracy, novelty, or veracity.
e) Originality: Is original work by the author and has not been previously published elsewhere.

2 Technical Criteria

a) Abstract: Includes an adequate summary with clear objectives, results, and standalone conclusions.
b) Title: Has an appropriate and concise title reflecting the true nature of the content.
c) Methodology: Employs scientific methods suitable for the scope of the research.
d) Conclusion: Draws logical conclusions based directly on the presented data and findings.
e) Language & Expression: Uses clear, concise sentences with well-expressed ideas.
f) English Proficiency: Written in good, correct English sufficient to convey academic purpose.
g) References Count: Contains a minimum of 10 references with at least 80% primary sources.
h) Formatting: Strictly follows official guidelines (fonts, numbering, table/figure captions).
i) Citation Tools: Uses IEEE citation style managed via EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley.
j) Rejection Policy: Poorly written papers will be returned for rewriting or rejected if authors fail to make required revisions.