1. Overview

All submissions to the conference undergo a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer-review process to ensure academic quality, originality, and technical soundness. The review process follows a double-blind review model, unless otherwise specified.

2. Submission and Initial Screening

2.1 Manuscript Submission

• Authors must submit full papers through the official conference submission system.
• Manuscripts must follow the prescribed template and formatting guidelines.
• Submissions must be original and not under consideration elsewhere.

2.2 Preliminary Editorial Check

Each submission is screened by the Technical Program Committee (TPC) for:

• Scope relevance
• Formatting compliance
• Plagiarism (using similarity detection software)
• Ethical compliance

Papers failing to meet minimum standards may be desk-rejected without external review.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review Process

3.1 Reviewer Assignment

• Each paper is assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers.
• Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise.
• Conflicts of interest are strictly avoided.

3.2 Blind Review Policy

• Authors do not know the reviewers' identities.
• Reviewers do not know the authors' identities.
• Authors must remove identifying information from manuscripts.

4. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers evaluate submissions based on:

• Originality and Novelty
• Technical/Scientific Quality
• Methodological Rigor
• Clarity of Presentation
• Relevance to Conference Themes
• Significance of Results
• References and Literature Review Quality

Each criterion is scored according to the conference review rubric.

5. Review Outcomes

Based on reviewer recommendations, papers may receive:

• Accept
• Accept with Minor Revisions
• Accept with Major Revisions
• Reject

The final decision is made by the Program Chair / Technical Program Committee, considering reviewer comments and scores.

6. Revision Process

• Authors receiving revision decisions must submit a revised manuscript.
• A response-to-reviewers document is required.
• Revised papers may undergo re-review.
• Failure to address reviewer comments may result in rejection.

7. Final Acceptance and Registration

• At least one author of each accepted paper must register and present the paper.
• Failure to present may result in exclusion from proceedings.

8. Confidentiality

• All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents.
• Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use unpublished material.
• Review materials are not disclosed outside the review process.

9. Conflict of Interest Policy

A conflict of interest exists when:

• Reviewer and author are from the same institution.
• There is recent collaboration.
• There is personal, financial, or professional conflict.

Reviewers must declare conflicts and recuse themselves.