Committee
Responsibilities
EMPOWERING INNOVATIONS : WHERE PRECISION MEETS RIGOR IN CONFERENCE EXCELLENCE
PROGRAM CHAIR RESPONSIBILITIES
- Supervise the review process, ensuring each paper undergoes scrutiny by at least two qualified reviewers.
- Implement a plagiarism check for all submitted papers.
- Oversee the completion of IEEE copyright forms by all authors, mandating conference registration for using the IEEE electronic copyright form.
- Ensure all accepted papers are presented at the conference ; un-presented.
TECHNICAL COMMITTEE CHAIR RESPONSIBILITIES
- Coordinate the review of proceedings papers within the committee, ensuring prompt, expert peer reviews and summarizing evaluations within designated deadlines.
- Possess the authority to reject papers that don't meet outlined requirements without further review.
- Organize technical sessions sponsored by the committee during the meeting.
- Allocate tracks to designated experts within the committee.
REVIEWER RESPONSIBILITIES
- Uphold confidentiality regarding both reviewed papers and review content until publication.
- Conduct selective, criteria-based reviews as per the conference's review form.
- Disclose conflicts of interest encountered during the review process.
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES
- Promote the event across various platforms.
- Identify potential conference sponsors.
- Develop branding material for event promotion.
- Manage venue and presentation logistics.
- Propose reviewers from reputable academic and industrial institutions.
- Recommend keynote speakers and session chairs.
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA & REASON FOR REJECTION
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
- Adherence to conference paper format and the 6-page limit.
- Meeting at least one of the following criteria :
- Importance to conference tracks
- Originality, design, and framework
- Clarity in abstract and methods
- Potential contribution to diversity, equity, inclusion and access
- Clarity in English language
REASONS FOR REJECTION
- Plagiarism or recycling well-established ideas without acknowledgment.
- Repetition of ideas from previous publications.
- Significant errors, poor writing, or unclear presentation.
- Commercial focus rather than technical merit.