All submitted papers will undergo a peer review process coordinated by the General Chairmen and one Associate Editor.
Authors are notified of acceptance when the Conference receives the comments and the recommendation of at least 3 qualified reviewers.
Reviewers cannot come from the same country with the authors and cannot have previous collaboration with the authors of the papers.
So, the Conference sends each paper to 3-5 independent reviewers, experts in the area of the paper.
So, each paper will be evaluated, at least, by three independent experts according to the following Criteria
1) Relevance to the Conference Topics
2) Scientific - Technical Originality, Potential Impact and Interest for the audience
3) Scientific/Technical Content and Advances beyond The State-Of-The-Art
4) Quality of the Presentation, clarity of the Content
5) Comments for the authors
The reviewers are going to indicate their familiarity with the paper's subject, evaluate the paper along the aforementioned criteria. Finally, the Editor-in-Chief or a Member of the Editorial Board will decide whether a paper will be accepted or not.
Our Score System will classify the papers as follows:
* Publish as it is
* Consider after Minor Changes
* Consider after Major Changes
If the Editor recommends "Publish as it is", then the manuscript will undergo a final check by the conference's editorial office in order to ensure that the manuscript and its review process adhere to the conference's guidelines and policies. Once this is done, the authors will be notified of the manuscript's acceptance, and the manuscript will appear in the Articles in Press section of the conference's website.
If the Editor recommends "Consider after Minor Changes," the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required minor changes suggested by the reviewers. The Editor reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted.
If the Editor recommends "Consider after Major Changes," the recommendation is communicated to the authors. The authors are expected to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the changes recommended by the reviewers and to submit their revised manuscript in a timely manner. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the Editor can then make an editorial recommendation which can be "Publish Unaltered", "Consider after Minor Changes", "Reject."
If the Editor recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Also, if the majority of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate.
Is this paper appropriate for the conference?
Does the paper present original and novel research results in Computational and Applied Mathematics & Computer Science ?
Is the paper significant and convincing for the Computational and Applied Mathematics & Computer Science ?
Does the title adequately represent the content of the paper?
Does the paper bribng novel research results on numerical, computational, applied mathematics along with modern simulation and modelling techniques, computational methods Computer Science?
Is the referencing appropriate?
Is the presentation high quality?
Do the methods, data, and analysis support the conclusions?
Is the paper clearly and concisely written?
Are the interpretations and conclusions supported by the evidence presented?
Are all parts of the text, references, graphics and tables necessary for the new results and main points to be understood?
Are the conclusions and potential impacts of the paper clear?
Are the graphics and tables clear and their captions self-explanatory?
Back to the main page