Editorial Policy

Discription

The papers will be reviewed by at least two or three reviewers, but usually by more to review the papers’ relevance, originality, technical quality, significance, and presentation.

The reviewer should account for their reviewing decision by providing sufficient, substantial, and well-founded comments that may help the authors optimize the paper. In addition, the reviewer is also probably asked to answer a series of questions by the program committee. After receiving the review comments, the authors are entitled to the rebuttal and its’ feedback. But the final review decision will not be changed in virtue of that.

Pre-view check

In this process, the editor will have a quick look at the manuscript and evaluate the overall impression of it such as relevance to the conference scope, originality of the paper, language, layout, artwork quality, and paper length.

Peer Review Policy Double-blind

The authors and reviewers are not aware of the identities of both sides.

Criteria Originality

The paper should be original, offer novel ideas, or achieve advances in the specific research areas.

Relevance to the conference

The research of the accepted paper should be relevant to the conference and important to the research field.

Significance

The paper should contain valid analysis and solid experiment design and should make a sufficient impact on the research field covered.

Quality of presentation

The quality of English language usage and grammar should be appropriate and easy to read. The presentation of the paper should be well-balanced and presented in a logical order.