Submissions
Our conferences follow a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the highest standards of scientific quality and integrity.
4–6 weeks
Typical Decision
Double-blind
Review Model
2+
Reviewers per paper
Open Access
Access
Authors submit their manuscript through the portal with title, abstract, full author list, keywords, and a complete paper. Submissions must be original, unpublished work.
The Managing Editor performs an initial check to verify scope fit, formatting compliance, ethical standards, and scientific soundness before sending to peer review.
The handling Associate Editor identifies two or more expert reviewers in the relevant field. The process is double-blind — authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other.
Reviewers evaluate the submission on originality, methodology, results, and contribution to the field. Each reviewer provides a structured report with specific feedback and a recommendation.
The Associate Editor synthesises reviewer reports and makes one of four decisions, communicated to the corresponding author with full reviewer feedback.
Authors address reviewer comments in a point-by-point response letter and resubmit. The revised manuscript may be re-sent to the original reviewers for verification.
Once accepted, the paper undergoes copy-editing and typesetting. Authors review proofs before the paper is published in the conference proceedings.
Plagiarism: All submissions are screened with plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts must be original works.
Authorship: All listed authors must have made substantial contributions to the work and approved the final version.
Conflicts of interest: Authors, editors, and reviewers must declare any competing interests that could bias their work.
Data integrity: Authors must provide access to underlying data upon request and retain original records.
If you have questions about our peer review process or submission guidelines, our team is here to help.
Contact Us