All submitted papers undergo an editorial screening process to ensure that they meet the conference’s submission requirements and are relevant to the scope of the conference.
Papers that pass the initial screening are sent to two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. The conference follows a double-anonymous peer-review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. The Editorial Board ensures an anonymous review process by concealing the authors’ identities and providing reviewers only with the manuscript content, without identifying information.
Reviewers evaluate each paper based on its originality, scientific quality, methodological soundness, relevance, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the field. Reviewers are expected to submit their evaluation reports within seven days of receiving the manuscript.
Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Editorial Board makes the final decision regarding each submission. Possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance subject to minor revisions, a request for major revisions, or rejection.
Authors are notified of the editorial decision by e-mail. Where revisions are required, authors receive feedback and instructions for making the necessary changes. Revised papers may be subject to further evaluation before a final decision is made.
Acceptance for publication is conditional upon the paper meeting the conference’s academic and technical requirements.
