a.Submissions must be original and cannot be under consideration elsewhere.
b.The correct templateis used.
c.There is no page limit, but papers that are significantly too long (or too short) will be subject to additional review. (A typical paper length is expected to be approximately 3,000-6,000 words, excluding references and figure/table captions.) Ideally, authors are encouraged to submit papers that are proportional to their contributions.
d.Papers must include sufficient detail to enable review of the rigor and reproducibility of the research. Conversely, the research in the paper cannot be adequately assessed and may not be considered at an early stage.
e.Authors are strongly encouraged to make efforts to improve the accessibility of their papers, including adding graphical descriptions. Please also feel free to contact us if you have any questions about creating accessible submissions.
Supplementary Materials (Optional) a.If a video figure is available, the recommendation is to try to keep it under 5 minutes, although there is no specified length for video figures.
b.Other supplemental materials may includesuch things as survey text, experimental protocols, source code, and data, all of which can help others replicate your work. Any non-video supplemental materials should be submitted as a single .zip file, including a README file containing a description of the material.
c.Please note that yourpaper submission must stand on its own in that reviewers are not required to review your supplemental materials.
Step 2. Submit Your Paper All materials, including paper submissions, video figureand any other supplemental materials, must be submitted by this deadline. No extensions are permitted. Please submit your contribution to MICCIS 2023 https://csubmit.elspublishing.com/login. (The papers submitted are encouraged as a result of domestic and foreign scholars to work together on joint research during which the collision of different ideas from all over the world may advance academic exchange and thefurther development of scientific research.)
Papers that do not meet the requirements will be returned to the author afterreview of the formatis done. As all reviews follow a single-blind procedure, each paper is reviewed by at least two reviewers, taking into account the following factors: relevance, originality, technical quality, significance and presentation. In case of unbridgeable differences between peer reviewers, the article will be submitted to the technical members of the conference organizing committee for review, and the technical chair of the conference will decide whether to accept the article or not. In the process of the peer review, the reviewer shall review the manuscripts as follows,
1.Whether the paper is in scope or out of scope
2.Whether the source material sorts out previous publications the is innovative compared to them
3.Whether the manuscript research was well designed and executed
4.Whether the data and analysis is clear,
5.Whether the presentation of ideas is concise, and logical
6.Whether all ethical requirements are met
For accepted papers, reviewers should also provide suggestions that might help the authors improve the paper, such as whether the experimental results are reasonable and whether the language needs polishing. The peer-reviewed articles will be submitted to the guest editors who will check the overall academic quality of all manuscripts. Authors are given a period of time to rebut the review decision, and if necessary, a workflow involving the chair and reviewers is initiated. All rebuttals will be answered, but the decision ultimately rests with the program chair.
For further information on preparing or submitting a contribution, please feel free to contact us.