ICESS 2024

Conference papers must meet all the usual standards of quality. However, reviewers will take into account the nature of conference papers. Review papers are also welcomed and accepted. Reviewers will consider background papers more favourably than would be normal for a regular paper. These allowances shall not go so far as to approve papers of low scientific standard. Papers that have been published in written form elsewhere should not be considered.  

Reviewers should consider the following key points related to scientific content, quality and presentation of the papers:

Technical Criteria

• Scientific merit: notably scientific rigour, accuracy and correctness
• Clarity of expression; communication of ideas; readability and discussion of concepts
• Sufficient discussion of the context of the work, and suitable referencing
• Authors must avoid the plagiarism, and they are encouraged to check the plagiarism with similarity check software. Editors will check the similarity index with Turnitin. ICONPO only accept manuscripts with similarity index less than 15%.
• The research manuscripts submitted to this conference will be peer-reviewed at least 2 (two) reviewers. Double-blind review is applied, where authors or reviewers’ identities are kept confidential. Final decision of the submitted manuscript is made by Editor based on reviewers’ critical comments.

Quality Criteria

• Originality: Is the work relevant and novel?
• Motivation: Does the problem considered have a sound motivation? All papers should clearly demonstrate the scientific interest of the results
• Repetition: Have significant parts of the manuscript already been published?
• Length: Is the content of the work of sufficient scientific interest to justify its length?

Presentation Criteria

• Title: Is it adequate and appropriate for the content of the article?
• Abstract: Does it contain the essential information of the article? Is it complete? Is it suitable for inclusion by itself in an abstracting service?
• Diagrams, figures, tables and captions: Are they essential and clear?
• Text and mathematics: Are they brief but still clear? If you recommend shortening, please suggest what should be removed
• Conclusion: Does the paper contain a clear conclusion. The conclusion should summarise what has been learned and why it is interesting and useful?